IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/umr/wpaper/201602.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: new insights from frontier analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Huiban, J.P.
  • Mastromarco, C.
  • Musolesi, A.
  • Simioni, M.

Abstract

This paper attempts to estimate the impact of pollution abatement investments on the production technology of firms by pursuing two new directions. First, we take advantage of recent econometric developments in productivity and efficiency analysis and compare the results obtained with two complementary approaches: parametric stochastic frontier analysis and conditional nonparametric frontier analysis. Second, we focus not only on the average effect but also on its heterogeneity across ?rms and over time and search for potential nonlinearities. We provide new results suggesting that such an effect is heterogeneous both within ?rms and over time and indicating that the effect of pollution abatement investments on the production process is not monotonic. These results have relevant implications both for modeling and for the purposes of advice on environmentally friendly policy. ....French Abstract : Cet article estime l’impact des investissements anti-pollution sur la technologie en suivant deux nouvelles directions. Premièrement, il s’inspire de travaux économétriques récents en analyse de la productivité et de l’efficacité et compare les résultats obtenus en utilisant deux approches complémentaires : l’approche paramétrique des frontières stochastiques de production et celle non paramétrique de frontières de production. Deuxièmement, l’analyse ne se concentre plus sur le seul comportement moyen mais s’intéresse à l’hétérogénéité des effets des investissements anti-pollution entre les firmes dans le temps. Une attention particulière est ainsi donnée à la détection de non linéarités. Les résultats empiriques apportent un éclairage nouveau sur ces effets en montrant qu’ils sont hétérogènes à la fois entre les firmes et dans le temps et qu’ils ne sont pas monotones. De tels résultats ont une implication en termes non seulement de modélisation des effets des investissements anti-pollution sur la technologie mais aussi de recommandations pour la politique environnementale de réduction des émissions polluantes des firmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Huiban, J.P. & Mastromarco, C. & Musolesi, A. & Simioni, M., 2016. "The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: new insights from frontier analysis," Working Papers MOISA 201602, UMR MOISA : Marchés, Organisations, Institutions et Stratégies d'Acteurs : CIHEAM-IAMM, CIRAD, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro - Montpellier, France.
  • Handle: RePEc:umr:wpaper:201602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/bartoli/moisa/bartoli/download/moisa2016_pdf/WP_2_2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    2. Peter Hall & Qi Li & Jeffrey S. Racine, 2007. "Nonparametric Estimation of Regression Functions in the Presence of Irrelevant Regressors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(4), pages 784-789, November.
    3. Shadbegian, Ronald J. & Gray, Wayne B., 2005. "Pollution abatement expenditures and plant-level productivity: A production function approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 196-208, August.
    4. Dale W. Jorgenson & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1990. "Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic Growth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(2), pages 314-340, Summer.
    5. André, Francisco J., 2015. "Strategic Effects and the Porter Hypothesis," MPRA Paper 62237, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Cinzia Daraio & Léopold Simar, 2005. "Introducing Environmental Variables in Nonparametric Frontier Models: a Probabilistic Approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 93-121, September.
    7. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    8. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel & Mundlak, Yair, 1978. "A Survey of Functional Forms in the Economic Analysis of Production," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters,in: Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.), Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, volume 1, chapter 4 McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    9. Hall, Peter G. & Racine, Jeffrey S., 2015. "Infinite order cross-validated local polynomial regression," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 185(2), pages 510-525.
    10. Badin, Luiza & Daraio, Cinzia & Simar, Léopold, 2010. "Optimal bandwidth selection for conditional efficiency measures: A data-driven approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(2), pages 633-640, March.
    11. Adam B. Jaffe & Karen Palmer, 1997. "Environmental Regulation And Innovation: A Panel Data Study," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 610-619, November.
    12. Tim Coelli & Sergio Perelman & Elliot Romano, 1999. "Accounting for Environmental Influences in Stochastic Frontier Models: With Application to International Airlines," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 251-273, June.
    13. Deborah Aiken & Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf & Carl Pasurka, 2009. "Pollution Abatement and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(1), pages 11-28, September.
    14. Camilla Mastromarco & Léopold Simar, 2015. "Effect of FDI and Time on Catching Up: New Insights from a Conditional Nonparametric Frontier Analysis," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 826-847, August.
    15. Peter Hall & Jeff Racine & Qi Li, 2004. "Cross-Validation and the Estimation of Conditional Probability Densities," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 1015-1026, December.
    16. Mohr, Robert D., 2002. "Technical Change, External Economies, and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 158-168, January.
    17. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    18. Bădin, Luiza & Daraio, Cinzia & Simar, Léopold, 2012. "How to measure the impact of environmental factors in a nonparametric production model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 818-833.
    19. Cazals, Catherine & Florens, Jean-Pierre & Simar, Leopold, 2002. "Nonparametric frontier estimation: a robust approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 1-25, January.
    20. Battese, G E & Coelli, T J, 1995. "A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 325-332.
    21. Greene, William, 2005. "Reconsidering heterogeneity in panel data estimators of the stochastic frontier model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 269-303, June.
    22. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    23. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    24. H. Fried & C. Lovell & S. Schmidt & S. Yaisawarng, 2002. "Accounting for Environmental Effects and Statistical Noise in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 157-174, January.
    25. Jondrow, James & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Materov, Ivan S. & Schmidt, Peter, 1982. "On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 233-238, August.
    26. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 1995. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 119-132, Fall.
    27. Guilkey, David K & Lovell, C A Knox & Sickles, Robin C, 1983. "A Comparison of the Performance of Three Flexible Functional Forms," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 24(3), pages 591-616, October.
    28. Qi Li & Jeffrey Scott Racine, 2006. "Nonparametric Econometrics: Theory and Practice," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8355, March.
    29. Daouia, Abdelaati & Simar, Leopold, 2007. "Nonparametric efficiency analysis: A multivariate conditional quantile approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 375-400, October.
    30. George E. Battese, 1997. "A Note On The Estimation Of Cobb‐Douglas Production Functions When Some Explanatory Variables Have Zero Values," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1‐3), pages 250-252, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    POLLUTION ABATEMENT INVESTMENTS; TECHNOLOGY; STOCHASTIC FRONTIER ANALYSIS; CONDITIONAL NONPARAMETRIC FRONTIER ANALYSIS; GENERALIZED PRODUCT KERNELS; GENERALIZED LOCAL POLYNOMIAL KERNEL REGRESSION; INVESTISSEMENTS ANTIPOLLUTION; TECHNOLOGIE; FRONTIERES STOCHASTIQUE DE PRODUCTION; ESTIMATION NON PARAMETRIQUE DES FRONTIERES DE PRODUCTION; ESTIMATEURS DE NOYAUX; INDUSTRIE AGROALIMENTAIRE FRANCAISE;

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:umr:wpaper:201602. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Isabelle Perez). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/moisafr.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.