IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-02147093.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Credibility of the REACH Regulation: Lessons Drawn from an ABM. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 92

Author

Listed:
  • Nabila Arfaoui

    (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur)

  • Eric Brouillat

    (GREThA - Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée - UB - Université de Bordeaux - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Maïder Saint Jean

    (GREThA - Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée - UB - Université de Bordeaux - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

The present paper takes ground on an agent-based model presented in Arfaoui et al. (2014) to investigate the effects of credibility upon technology substitution such as stimulated by the REACH regulation (EC 1907/2006). The model is used to study how the perceived credibility by clients on the one hand and the perceived credibility by suppliers on the other hand influence or not the transition from an old established technology to a new safer technology in two opposite scenarios: when the scenario is highly stringent (HS) or weakly stringent (LS) in terms of target performance and timing. Results show that enhancing client credibility favours technology substitution by accelerating the diffusion of the new environmental technology and benefits the environment. However higher client credibility in the LS has counterproductive effects since suppliers have to face a strong pressure by clients to adopt the new technology but it is not accompanied by a forceful discrimination by public authority. When considering supplier credibility, there is no significant influence except that higher supplier credibility in the LS means stronger pressure to adopt early T2 and to get a mixed portfolio but it turns to be premature since the demand is not ready to buy such a technology.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Nabila Arfaoui & Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean, 2015. "Credibility of the REACH Regulation: Lessons Drawn from an ABM. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 92," Working Papers hal-02147093, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02147093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    2. Arfaoui, Nabila & Brouillat, Eric & Saint Jean, Maïder, 2014. "Policy design and technological substitution: Investigating the REACH regulation in an agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 347-365.
    3. Rennings, Klaus, 2000. "Redefining innovation -- eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 319-332, February.
    4. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    5. Kemp, René & Pontoglio, Serena, 2011. "The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 28-36.
    6. Hahn, Robert W, 1989. "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor's Orders," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 95-114, Spring.
    7. Harstad, Bård & Eskeland, Gunnar S., 2010. "Trading for the future: Signaling in permit markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 749-760, October.
    8. James Forder, 2001. "The Theory of Credibility and the Reputation-bias of Policy," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 5-25.
    9. Nick Johnstone (ed.), 2007. "Environmental Policy and Corporate Behaviour," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12551.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karl Aiginger, 2016. "New Dynamics for Europe: Reaping the Benefits of Socio-ecological Transition – Part I: Synthesis. WWWforEurope Deliverable No. 11," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58791, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nabila Arfaoui & Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint-Jean, 2015. "The Impact of REACH on Eco-Innovation: How Perception Misfits on Policy Stringency Matter," GREDEG Working Papers 2015-45, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Cantono, Simona, 2012. "Unveiling diffusion dynamics: an autocatalytic percolation model of environmental innovation diffusion and the optimal dynamic path of adoption subsidies," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201222, University of Turin.
    3. Yang, Fuxia & Yang, Mian, 2015. "Analysis on China's eco-innovations: Regulation context, intertemporal change and regional differences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 1003-1012.
    4. Arfaoui, Nabila & Brouillat, Eric & Saint Jean, Maïder, 2014. "Policy design and technological substitution: Investigating the REACH regulation in an agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 347-365.
    5. Fabrizi, Andrea & Guarini, Giulio & Meliciani, Valentina, 2018. "Green patents, regulatory policies and research network policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1018-1031.
    6. Pinget, Amandine, 2016. "Spécificités des déterminants des innovations environnementales : une approche appliquée aux PME [Specificities of determinants for environmental innovation : an approach applied to SMEs]," MPRA Paper 80108, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Nabila Arfaoui & Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint-Jean, 2013. "Policy Design, Eco-innovation and Industrial Dynamics in an Agent-Based Model: An Illustration with the REACH Regulation," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-22, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Oct 2013.
    8. Christoph P. Kiefer & Pablo Del Río González & Javier Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2019. "Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 155-172, January.
    9. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    10. Giulio Guarini & Giuseppe Garofalo & Alessandro Federici, 2014. "A Virtuous Cumulative Growth Circle among Innovation, Inclusion and Sustainability? A Structuralist-Keynesian Analysis with an Application on Europe," GREDEG Working Papers 2014-39, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    11. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean, 2020. "Mind the gap: Investigating the impact of implementation gaps on cleaner technology transition," Post-Print hal-03490256, HAL.
    12. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    13. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint-Jean, 2019. "Dura lex sed lex: why implementation gaps in environmental policy matter?," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2019-04, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    14. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Sandro Montresor, 2012. "Environmental Innovations, Local Networks and Internationalization," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 697-734, November.
    15. Hoppmann, Joern & Peters, Michael & Schneider, Malte & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2013. "The two faces of market support—How deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 989-1003.
    16. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Giovanni Marin & Susanna Mancinelli & Francesco Nicolli, 2015. "Carbon dioxide reducing environmental innovations, sector upstream/downstream integration and policy: evidence from the EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 709-735, November.
    17. Tilmann Rave & Ursula Triebswetter & Johann Wackerbauer, 2013. "Koordination von Innovations-, Energie- und Umweltpolitik," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 61, October.
    18. Nabila Arfaoui, 2014. "Eco-innovation and Regulatory Push/Pull Effect in the Case of REACH Regulation: Empirical Evidence from Survey Data," GREDEG Working Papers 2014-19, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Dec 2015.
    19. Karoline S. Rogge & Elisabeth Dütschke, 2017. "Exploring Perceptions of the Credibility of Policy Mixes: The Case of German Manufacturers of Renewable Power Generation Technologies," SPRU Working Paper Series 2017-23, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    20. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger & Herrmann, Johannes & Kalthaus, Martin, 2016. "Inventor networks in renewable energies: The influence of the policy mix in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1165-1184.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02147093. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.