IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fau/fauart/v59y2009i5p442-459.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increasing Energy and Resource Efficiency through Innovation: An Explorative Analysis Using Innovation Survey Data

Author

Abstract

Energy and resource efficiency innovations (EREIs) are often seen as win-win opportunities for both the economic and the environmental performance of firms. It is thus worth asking how the innovation activities and performance of firms with regard to energy and resource efficiency look like: Do EREI firms follow distinct innovation strategies? Do EREIs spur or limit innovation success? And what are the particular features of EREI firms compared to conventional innovators? Using German innovation data, the authors find that EREIs are determined by a larger set of technology-push and market-pull factors. On the supply side, R&D budgets, research infrastructure and networking with other firms are important factors of influence, while on the demand side increased productivity and cost reductions are decisive, as well as improved product quality. On the other hand, EREIs are complex activities which also need regulatory incentives. Although EREIs are not more successful compared to conventional innovations, they contribute substantially to the economic success of firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Rennings & Christian Rammer, 2009. "Increasing Energy and Resource Efficiency through Innovation: An Explorative Analysis Using Innovation Survey Data," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 59(5), pages 442-459, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:fau:fauart:v:59:y:2009:i:5:p:442-459
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journal.fsv.cuni.cz/storage/1169_str_442_459.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    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. Fatoumata Nankoto Cissé, 2022. "How impact evaluation methods influence the outcomes of development projects? Evidence from a meta-analysis on decentralized solar nano projects," Post-Print halshs-03623394, HAL.
    2. Petra Todd & Kenneth I. Wolpin, 2002. "Using a Social Experiment to Validate a Dynamic Behavioral Model of Child Schooling and Fertility: Assessing the Impact of a School Subsidy Program in Mexico," PIER Working Paper Archive 03-022, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Sep 2003.
    3. Andrea Pufahl & Christoph R. Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: results from propensity score matching," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(1), pages 79-101, March.
    4. Yasuyuki Todo & Tomohiko Inui & Yuan Yuan, 2014. "Effects of Privatization on Exporting Decisions: Firm-level Evidence from Chinese State-owned Enterprises," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 56(4), pages 536-555, December.
    5. Ellison, Richard B. & Ellison, Adrian B. & Greaves, Stephen P. & Sampaio, Breno, 2017. "Electronic ticketing systems as a mechanism for travel behaviour change? Evidence from Sydney’s Opal card," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 80-93.
    6. Cappelletti, Giuseppe & Reghezza, Alessio & Rodríguez d'Acri, Costanza & Spaggiari, Martina, 2022. "Compositional effects of bank capital buffers and interactions with monetary policy," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    7. Hye Yoon Chung & Youjin Hahn, 2021. "Work Transitions, Gender, and Subjective Well-Being," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(5), pages 2085-2109, October.
    8. Nolan, Anne, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of eligibility for free care on the use of general practitioner (GP) services: A difference-in-difference matching approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(7), pages 1164-1172, October.
    9. González-Uribe, Juanita & Reyes, Santiago, 2021. "Identifying and boosting “Gazelles”: Evidence from business accelerators," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 260-287.
    10. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    11. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain, 2015. "Analysis of the bias of Matching and Difference-in-Difference under alternative earnings and selection processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 110-123.
    12. Alexander Hijzen & Sébastien Jean & Thierry Mayer, 2011. "The effects at home of initiating production abroad: evidence from matched French firms," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(3), pages 457-483, September.
    13. Tang, Shengfang & Huang, Zhilin, 2022. "Empirical likelihood confidence interval for difference-in-differences estimator with panel data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    14. Gunther Bensch & Jörg Peters, 2013. "Alleviating Deforestation Pressures? Impacts of Improved Stove Dissemination on Charcoal Consumption in Urban Senegal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 676-698.
    15. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Jeffrey Smith, 2000. "A Critical Survey of Empirical Methods for Evaluating Active Labor Market Policies," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 136(III), pages 247-268, September.
    17. Kuhn, Dieter, 2011. "Delayering and Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss firm-level Data," Working papers 2011/02, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    18. Agnes Quisumbing & Neha Kumar, 2011. "Does social capital build women's assets? The long-term impacts of group-based and individual dissemination of agricultural technology in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 220-242.
    19. Meng, Xuechen & Lin, Shanlang & Zhu, Xiaochuan, 2018. "The resource redistribution effect of high-speed rail stations on the economic growth of neighbouring regions: Evidence from China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 178-191.
    20. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    resource efficiency; energy efficiency; environmental innovations; innovation surveys;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:fau:fauart:v:59:y:2009:i:5:p:442-459. 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: Natalie Svarcova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icunicz.html .

    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.