Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis

Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis present three distinct variants of the so‐called Porter Hypothesis. The “weak” version of the hypothesis posits that environmental regulation will stimulate environmental innovations. The “narrow” version of the hypothesis asserts that flexible environmental policy regimes give firms greater incentive to innovate than prescriptive regulations, such as technology‐based standards. Finally, the “strong” version posits that properly designed regulation may induce cost‐saving innovation that more than compensates for the cost of compliance. In this paper, we test the significance of these different variants of the Porter Hypothesis using data on the four main elements of the hypothesised causality chain (environmental policy, research and development, environmental performance, and commercial performance). The analysis draws upon a database that includes observations from approximately 4,200 facilities in seven OECD countries. In general, we find strong support for the “weak” version, qualified support for the “narrow” version, but no support for the “strong” version. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Economics & Management Strategy Wiley

Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/environmental-policy-innovation-and-performance-new-insights-on-the-cNKTVNpfqZ

References (113)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
ISSN
1058-6407
eISSN
1530-9134
DOI
10.1111/j.1530-9134.2011.00301.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

present three distinct variants of the so‐called Porter Hypothesis. The “weak” version of the hypothesis posits that environmental regulation will stimulate environmental innovations. The “narrow” version of the hypothesis asserts that flexible environmental policy regimes give firms greater incentive to innovate than prescriptive regulations, such as technology‐based standards. Finally, the “strong” version posits that properly designed regulation may induce cost‐saving innovation that more than compensates for the cost of compliance. In this paper, we test the significance of these different variants of the Porter Hypothesis using data on the four main elements of the hypothesised causality chain (environmental policy, research and development, environmental performance, and commercial performance). The analysis draws upon a database that includes observations from approximately 4,200 facilities in seven OECD countries. In general, we find strong support for the “weak” version, qualified support for the “narrow” version, but no support for the “strong” version.

Journal

Journal of Economics & Management StrategyWiley

Published: Sep 1, 2011

There are no references for this article.