IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i22p15375-d977347.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Firms That Are Disadvantaged by Unilateral Climate Policy Receive Compensation? Evidence from China’s Energy-Saving Quota Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Weiming Lin

    (School of Jinshan, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Jianling Chen

    (School of Finance, Fujian Jiangxia University, Fuzhou 350002, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Jianbang Gan

    (Department of Ecosystem Science and Management, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA)

  • Yongwu Dai

    (Anxi College of Tea Science, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Quanzhou 350028, China)

Abstract

Inequities caused by a unilateral climate policy may threaten the sustainability of CO 2 emission reduction efforts by countries and firms, thus endangering sustainable development for humans and the eco-environment. However, few studies have conducted ex-post evaluations on whether environmentally regulated firms receive external compensation such as subsidies, tax reductions, and loan support. Thus, this study investigates whether firms experiencing inequitable conditions under China’s Energy-Saving Quota Policy (ESQP) are financially compensated. It develops a balanced panel of data from 6189 ESQP-regulated and 6189 unregulated firms from 2010 to 2013, and combines a probit model with the difference-in-differences method to conduct empirical analysis. The results show that ESQP-regulated firms receive more subsidy income and lower tax rates than unregulated firms. Of the ESQP-regulated firms, companies with higher energy-saving burdens receive larger subsidies and lower financial expense ratios than those with lower burdens. Additionally, firms that complete their energy-saving quotas are compensated with larger subsidies and/or lower financial expense ratios and tax rates than those that fail to complete them. Finally, state-owned firms receive more subsidies than private ones. Unlike the emission trading schemes implemented worldwide that formulate an exemption mechanism (i.e., free or over-allocated allowances), the ESQP does not exempt regulated firms from their energy-saving responsibilities. Rather, regulated firms receive a greater amount of external compensation in exchange for their reductions in energy consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Weiming Lin & Jianling Chen & Jianbang Gan & Yongwu Dai, 2022. "Do Firms That Are Disadvantaged by Unilateral Climate Policy Receive Compensation? Evidence from China’s Energy-Saving Quota Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15375-:d:977347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15375/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/22/15375/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    2. Gawel, Erik & Strunz, Sebastian & Lehmann, Paul, 2014. "A public choice view on the climate and energy policy mix in the EU — How do the emissions trading scheme and support for renewable energies interact?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 175-182.
    3. Zhang, Bing & Chen, Xiaolan & Guo, Huanxiu, 2018. "Does central supervision enhance local environmental enforcement? Quasi-experimental evidence from China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 70-90.
    4. Naegele, Helene & Zaklan, Aleksandar, 2019. "Does the EU ETS cause carbon leakage in European manufacturing?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 93, pages 125-147.
    5. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2017. "Reviewing, Reforming, and Rethinking Global Energy Subsidies: Towards a Political Economy Research Agenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 150-163.
    7. Stefan Ćetković & Aron Buzogány, 2016. "Varieties of capitalism and clean energy transitions in the European Union: When renewable energy hits different economic logics," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 642-657, July.
    8. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    9. Petrick, Sebastian & Wagner, Ulrich J., 2014. "The impact of carbon trading on industry: Evidence from German manufacturing firms," Kiel Working Papers 1912, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Natalia Fabra & Mar Reguant, 2014. "Pass-Through of Emissions Costs in Electricity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2872-2899, September.
    11. Cathrine Hagem & Michael Hoel & Thomas Sterner, 2020. "Refunding Emission Payments: Output-Based Versus Expenditure-Based Refunding," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 641-667, November.
    12. Böhringer, Christoph & Carbone, Jared C. & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2012. "Unilateral climate policy design: Efficiency and equity implications of alternative instruments to reduce carbon leakage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S2), pages 208-217.
    13. James B. Bushnell & Howard Chong & Erin T. Mansur, 2013. "Profiting from Regulation: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 78-106, November.
    14. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Misato Sato, 2017. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Competitiveness," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 183-206.
    15. Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Mu?ls & Laure B. de Preux & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2014. "Industry Compensation under Relocation Risk: A Firm-Level Analysis of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2482-2508, August.
    16. Chan, Hei Sing (Ron) & Li, Shanjun & Zhang, Fan, 2013. "Firm competitiveness and the European Union emissions trading scheme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1056-1064.
    17. Alecke Björn & Reinkowski Janina & Mitze Timo & Untiedt Gerhard, 2012. "Does Firm Size make a Difference? Analysing the Effectiveness of R&D Subsidies in East Germany," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 174-195, May.
    18. Jurate Jaraite-Ka~ukauske and Corrado Di Maria, 2016. "Did the EU ETS Make a Difference? An Empirical Assessment Using Lithuanian Firm-Level Data," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    19. Yusuf Emre Akgündüz & Süleyman Hilmi Kal & Huzeyfe Torun, 2018. "Do subsidised export loans increase exports?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 2200-2215, August.
    20. Corradini, Massimiliano & Costantini, Valeria & Markandya, Anil & Paglialunga, Elena & Sforna, Giorgia, 2018. "A dynamic assessment of instrument interaction and timing alternatives in the EU low-carbon policy mix design," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 73-84.
    21. Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2008. "Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 142-162, March.
    22. Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Gennaioli, Caterina & Martin, Ralf & Muûls, Mirabelle & Stoerk, Thomas, 2022. "Searching for carbon leaks in multinational companies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    23. Eugénie Joltreau & Katrin Sommerfeld, 2019. "Why does emissions trading under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) not affect firms’ competitiveness? Empirical findings from the literature," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 453-471, April.
    24. Vidar Christiansen & Stephen Smith, 2015. "Emissions Taxes and Abatement Regulation Under Uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(1), pages 17-35, January.
    25. Böhringer, Christoph & Bye, Brita & Fæhn, Taran & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2017. "Targeted carbon tariffs: Export response, leakage and welfare," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 51-73.
    26. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2012. "Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: Border carbon adjustments versus rebates," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 199-216.
    27. Yang Yao & Muyang Zhang, 2015. "Subnational leaders and economic growth: evidence from Chinese cities," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 405-436, December.
    28. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Kuik, Onno & Paglialunga, Elena, 2016. "Mitigation of adverse effects on competitiveness and leakage of unilateral EU climate policy: An assessment of policy instruments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 246-259.
    29. Jakob, Michael, 2021. "Climate policy and international trade – A critical appraisal of the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    30. Bernard, Alain L. & Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2007. "Is there a rationale for output-based rebating of environmental levies?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 83-101, May.
    31. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2011. "The generation and exploitation of technological change: market value and total factor productivity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 353-382, August.
    32. Panagiotis Fragkos & Kostas Fragkiadakis & Leonidas Paroussos, 2021. "Reducing the Decarbonisation Cost Burden for EU Energy-Intensive Industries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-23, January.
    33. Jan Abrell & Anta Ndoye Faye & Georg Zachmann, 2011. "Assessing the impact of the EU ETS using firm level data," Working Papers of BETA 2011-15, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    34. Sourafel Girma & Yundan Gong & Holger Görg & Zhihong Yu, 2009. "Can Production Subsidies Explain China's Export Performance? Evidence from Firm‐level Data," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(4), pages 863-891, December.
    35. Bian, Junsong & Zhao, Xuan, 2020. "Tax or subsidy? An analysis of environmental policies in supply chains with retail competition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 901-914.
    36. Meleo, Linda, 2014. "On the determinants of industrial competitiveness: The European Union emission trading scheme and the Italian paper industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 535-546.
    37. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10174 is not listed on IDEAS
    38. James Heckman, 1997. "Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 441-462.
    39. Lutz, Benjamin Johannes, 2016. "Emissions trading and productivity: Firm-level evidence from German manufacturing," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-067, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    40. Haley, Usha C.V. & Haley, George T., 2013. "Subsidies to Chinese Industry: State Capitalism, Business Strategy, and Trade Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199773749.
    41. Anger, Niels & Oberndorfer, Ulrich, 2008. "Firm performance and employment in the EU emissions trading scheme: An empirical assessment for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 12-22, January.
    42. Marco Mariani & Fabrizia Mealli, 2018. "The Effects of R&D Subsidies to Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Evidence from a Regional Program," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 4(2), pages 249-281, July.
    43. Federica Genovese & Endre Tvinnereim, 2019. "Who opposes climate regulation? Business preferences for the European emission trading scheme," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 511-542, September.
    44. Dai, Xiaoyong & Cheng, Liwei, 2015. "The effect of public subsidies on corporate R&D investment: An application of the generalized propensity score," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 410-419.
    45. Jingbo Cui & Junjie Zhang & Yang Zheng, 2018. "Carbon Pricing Induces Innovation: Evidence from China's Regional Carbon Market Pilots," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 453-457, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Böning, Justus & Di Nino, Virginia & Folger, Till, 2023. "Benefits and costs of the ETS in the EU, a lesson learned for the CBAM design," Working Paper Series 2764, European Central Bank.
    2. Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Nachtigall, Daniel & Venmans, Frank, 2023. "The joint impact of the European Union emissions trading system on carbon emissions and economic performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Marit Klemetsen & Knut Einar Rosendahl & Anja Lund Jakobsen, 2020. "The Impacts Of The Eu Ets On Norwegian Plants’ Environmental And Economic Performance," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 1-32, February.
    4. Sadayuki, Taisuke & Arimura, Toshi H., 2021. "Do regional emission trading schemes lead to carbon leakage within firms? Evidence from Japan," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    5. Hafele, Jakob & Kuhls, Sonia, 2022. "Trade-off or tension: Can carbon be priced without risking economic competitiveness?," ZOE Discussion Papers 9, ZOE. institute for future-fit economies, Bonn.
    6. aus dem Moore, Nils & Großkurth, Philipp & Themann, Michael, 2017. "Multinational corporations and the EU emissions trading system: Asset erosion and creeping deindustrialization?," Ruhr Economic Papers 719, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. aus dem Moore, Nils & Großkurth, Philipp & Themann, Michael, 2019. "Multinational corporations and the EU Emissions Trading System: The specter of asset erosion and creeping deindustrialization," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-26.
    8. Flori, Andrea & Borghesi, Simone & Marin, Giovanni, 2024. "The environmental-financial performance nexus of EU ETS firms: A quantile regression approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Giovanni Marin & Marianna Marino & Claudia Pellegrin, 2018. "The impact of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme on Multiple Measures of Economic Performance," Post-Print hal-01768870, HAL.
    10. Ambec, Stefan & Esposito, Federico & Pacelli, Antonia, 2024. "The economics of carbon leakage mitigation policies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    11. Giovanni Marin & Marianna Marino & Claudia Pellegrin, 2018. "The Impact of the European Emission Trading Scheme on Multiple Measures of Economic Performance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 551-582, October.
    12. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Kuik, Onno & Paglialunga, Elena, 2016. "Mitigation of adverse effects on competitiveness and leakage of unilateral EU climate policy: An assessment of policy instruments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 246-259.
    13. Arjan Trinks & Erik Hille, 2023. "Carbon costs and industrial firm performance: Evidence from international microdata," CPB Discussion Paper 445, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    14. Martin, Ralf & Muûls, Mirabelle & de Preux, Laure B. & Wagner, Ulrich J., 2014. "On the empirical content of carbon leakage criteria in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 78-88.
    15. Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Gennaioli, Caterina & Martin, Ralf & Muûls, Mirabelle & Stoerk, Thomas, 2022. "Searching for carbon leaks in multinational companies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    16. Cludius, Johanna & de Bruyn, Sander & Schumacher, Katja & Vergeer, Robert, 2020. "Ex-post investigation of cost pass-through in the EU ETS - an analysis for six industry sectors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Filippo Maria D'Arcangelo & Marzio Galeotti, 2022. "Environmental Policy and Investment Location: The Risk of Carbon Leakage in the EU ETS," Working Papers 2022.27, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Wang, Maria & Kuusi, Tero, 2024. "Trade flows, carbon leakage, and the EU Emissions Trading System," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    19. Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Mu?ls & Laure B. de Preux & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2014. "Industry Compensation under Relocation Risk: A Firm-Level Analysis of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(8), pages 2482-2508, August.
    20. Joltreau, Eugénie & Sommerfeld, Katrin, 2016. "Why does emissions trading under the EU ETS not affect firms' competitiveness? Empirical findings from the literature," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-062, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:22:p:15375-:d:977347. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.