Technological changes in the pulp and paper industry and the role of uniform versus selective environmental policy
Although environmental regulations may imply a cost increase on firm's conventional input factors, such regulations could stimulate the incentives to improve factor productivity. Productivity measures including indicators capturing environmental improvements may also show higher or lower progress than productivity measures ignoring environmental aspects. We apply a Malmquist productivity index approach on micro data for the Norwegian pulp and paper industry, and find that the overall productivity growth accounting for changes in emissions of COD to water is higher than the growth in the productivity measure including conventional inputs only. We find the opposite result when including emissions of acids and climate gases to air. This is probably due to environmental regulations with opposing effects on different emissions. A decomposition of the Malmquist index into a technical efficiency change factor and a technical change component shows that the frontier technology has changed, while the average distance to the frontier has increased.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2003|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: P.O.Box 8131 Dep, N-0033 Oslo, Norway|
Phone: (+47) 21 09 00 00
Fax: +47 - 62 88 55 95
Web page: http://www.ssb.no/en/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Klette, Tor Jakob, 1999.
"Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data,"
Journal of Industrial Economics,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 451-476, December.
- Klette, T.J., 1998. "Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data," Memorandum 15/1998, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
- Forsund, Finn R. & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1980. "A survey of frontier production functions and of their relationship to efficiency measurement," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 5-25, May.
- Tulkens, Henry & Vanden Eeckaut, Philippe, 1995. "Non-frontier measures of efficiency, progress and regress for time series data," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1-2), pages 83-97, April.
- Tulkens, H. & Vanden Eeckaut, P., "undated". "Non-frontier measures of efficiency, progress and regress for time series data," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1159, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Goulder, Lawrence H. & Parry, Ian W. H. & Williams III, Roberton C. & Burtraw, Dallas, 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 329-360, June.
- Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 1998. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," NBER Working Papers 6464, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Burtraw, Dallas & Parry, Ian & Goulder, Lawrence & Williams III, Roberton, 1998. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Discussion Papers dp-98-22, Resources For the Future.
- Forsund, Finn R & Jansen, Eilev S, 1983. " Technical Progress and Structural Change in the Norwegian Primary Aluminum Industry," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 85(2), pages 113-126.
- Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001. "Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 211-218, September.
- Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001. "Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 25(2-3), September.
- Bovenberg, A Lans & van der Ploeg, Frederick, 1993. "Green Policies in a Small Open Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 785, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bovenberg, A.L. & van der Ploeg, F., 1994. "Green policies in a small open economy," Other publications TiSEM 31842095-d9e5-4693-ab81-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Tor Jakob Klette & Arvid Raknerud, 2002. "How and why do Firms differ?," Discussion Papers 320, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
- Jakob Klette, Tor & Raknerud, Arvid, 2003. "How and why do firms differ?," Memorandum 30/2002, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
- Runar Brännlund & Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 1995. "Environmental regulation and profitability: An application to Swedish pulp and paper mills," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 23-36, July.
- Bovenberg, A Lans & van der Ploeg, Frederick, 1994. " Green Policies and Public Finance in a Small Open Economy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(3), pages 343-363.
- Annegrete Bruvoll & Hege Medin, 2003. "Factors Behind the Environmental Kuznets Curve. A Decomposition of the Changes in Air Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(1), pages 27-48, January.
- Annegrete Bruvoll & Hege Medin, 2000. "Factoring the environmental Kuznets curve Evidence from Norway," Discussion Papers 275, Statistics Norway, Research Department.