IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p12982-d938319.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Forced Transformation” or “Regulation Capture”—Research on the Interactive Mechanism between Environmental Regulation and Green Transformation of Dairy Farming Subject Production

Author

Listed:
  • Jiabin Xu

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Tianyi Wang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Jingjing Wang

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Cuixia Li

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Limei Zhao

    (Institute of Rural Development, Sichuan Academy of Social Sciences, Chengdu 610071, China)

Abstract

Under the situation of an increasing resource and environment shortage, the green transformation of dairy farming subject production driven by environmental regulation is the concentrated embodiment of a “promising government” to solve the problem of breeding environmental pollution. Due to the shortcomings of environmental regulation itself and the undefined connotation of the green transformation of dairy farming subject production, the interactive relationship between the two remains unclear at present. Based on defining the concept of green transformation of dairy farming subject production, this paper aims to analyze the interactive mechanism between the environmental regulation and green transformation of dairy farming main production, build a dynamic game model between the environmental regulators and dairy farming subject, and introduce the constraints and benefits of a reputation mechanism on the behavior in the model to explore whether environmental regulation can drive the green transformation of dairy farming subject production. The results showed that the green transformation of dairy farming subject production followed the “subject substitution view” and emphasized “source reduction, process control and terminal treatment”. Strictly designed environmental regulations could effectively drive the green transformation of dairy farming subject production, but it was inevitable that the environmental regulators were vulnerable to the rent-seeking behavior of dairy farming subjects, which was “regulation capture”. The introduction of the reputation mechanism has greatly improved the rent-seeking behavior of dairy farming subjects and the probability that environmental regulators have “regulation capture”, indirectly forcing dairy farming subjects to participate in the green transformation of production. The greater the punishment for dairy farming subjects who do not participate in the green transformation of production was, the more they can be forced to participate in the green transformation of production. At the same time, it also reduces the risk of damage to the credibility of the government. Based on the studies above, this paper also further discussed the shortcomings of environmental regulation itself, including the “re exit and light implementation” of the environmental regulation policy, “decentralization and light inspection” of the environmental regulation subject, “result and light process” of the environmental regulation mode, and “formal regulation and light informal regulation” of the environmental regulation form, which provides a scientific reference for the formulation of the environmental regulation policy of livestock and poultry breeding in the future. Compared with previous studies, this paper is innovative in two aspects: first, it defines the conceptual connotation of a green transformation of dairy farming subject production, and second, it systematically discusses the interaction mechanism between the environmental regulation and green transformation of dairy farming subject production. This paper provides a scientific reference for the development of future environmental regulation policies for livestock and poultry farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiabin Xu & Tianyi Wang & Jingjing Wang & Cuixia Li & Limei Zhao, 2022. "“Forced Transformation” or “Regulation Capture”—Research on the Interactive Mechanism between Environmental Regulation and Green Transformation of Dairy Farming Subject Production," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12982-:d:938319
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12982/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12982/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Obubuafo, Joyce & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Kim, Seon-Ae, 2008. "Awareness of and Application to the Environmental Quality Incentives Program By Cow–Calf Producers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-12, April.
    2. Cass R. Sunstein, 2017. "Human Agency and Behavioral Economics," Palgrave Advances in Behavioral Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-3-319-55807-3, February.
    3. Kassie, Menale & Jaleta, Moti & Shiferaw, Bekele & Mmbando, Frank & Mekuria, Mulugetta, 2013. "Adoption of interrelated sustainable agricultural practices in smallholder systems: Evidence from rural Tanzania," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 525-540.
    4. repec:cup:jagaec:v:40:y:2008:i:1:p:357-368_8 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Gustafsson, Bo, 1998. "Scope and limits of the market mechanism in environmental management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 259-274, February.
    7. Giorgio Petroni & Barbara Bigliardi & Francesco Galati, 2019. "Rethinking the Porter Hypothesis: The Underappreciated Importance of Value Appropriation and Pollution Intensity," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 36(1), pages 121-140, January.
    8. Xueping Jiang & Jen-Mei Chang & Hui Sun, 2019. "Inframarginal Model Analysis of the Evolution of Agricultural Division of Labor," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-14, December.
    9. Albrizio, Silvia & Kozluk, Tomasz & Zipperer, Vera, 2017. "Environmental policies and productivity growth: Evidence across industries and firms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 209-226.
    10. Marty Chen, 2005. "Rethinking the Informal Economy: Linkages with the Formal Economy and the Formal Regulatory Environment," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2005-10, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Qian Li & Jingjing Wang & Xiaoyang Wang & Yubin Wang, 2020. "The impact of alternative policies on livestock farmers' willingness to recycle manure: evidence from central China," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(4), pages 583-594, June.
    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. Liu, Xiangsheng & Lv, Lingli, 2023. "The effect of China's low carbon city pilot policy on corporate financialization," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    2. Wunhong Su & Chun Guo & Xiaobao Song, 2022. "Media coverage, Environment Protection Law and environmental research and development: evidence from the Chinese-listed firms," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6953-6983, May.
    3. Haluk Gedikoglu & Sansel Tandogan & Joseph Parcell, 2023. "Neighbor effects on adoption of conservation practices: cases of grass filter systems and injecting manure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 70(3), pages 723-756, June.
    4. Chen, Wen & Zhu, Yufeng & He, Zehui & Yang, Yang, 2022. "The effect of local government debt on green innovation: Evidence from Chinese listed companies," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    5. Bresciani, Stefano & Puertas, Rosa & Ferraris, Alberto & Santoro, Gabriele, 2021. "Innovation, environmental sustainability and economic development: DEA-Bootstrap and multilevel analysis to compare two regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    6. Ping Wang & Hua Bu & Fengqin Liu, 2022. "Internal Control and Enterprise Green Innovation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Vasileiou, Efi & Georgantzis, Nikolaos & Attanasi, Giuseppe & Llerena, Patrick, 2022. "Green innovation and financial performance: A study on Italian firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    8. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Bengochea-Morancho, Aurelia & Morales-Lage, Rafael, 2019. "Does environmental policy stringency foster innovation and productivity in OECD countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    9. Ruishi Si & Sitong Pan & Yuxin Yuan & Qian Lu & Shuxia Zhang, 2019. "Assessing the Impact of Environmental Regulation on Livestock Manure Waste Recycling: Empirical Evidence from Households in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-17, October.
    10. Xiang Deng & Li Li, 2020. "Promoting or Inhibiting? The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Corporate Financial Performance—An Empirical Analysis Based on China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Zhang, Ming & Zhao, Yingxue, 2023. "Does environmental regulation spur innovation? Quasi-natural experiment in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Xijia Huang & Yiting Guo & Yuming Lin & Liping Liu & Kai Yan, 2022. "Green Loans and Green Innovations: Evidence from China’s Equator Principles Banks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    13. Zhang, Yijun & Song, Yi, 2022. "Tax rebates, technological innovation and sustainable development: Evidence from Chinese micro-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Lu Qiu & Die Hu & Yu Wang, 2020. "How do firms achieve sustainability through green innovation under external pressures of environmental regulation and market turbulence?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2695-2714, September.
    15. Shanshan Liu & Yugang Li, 2024. "Exploration or Exploitation? Corporate Green Innovation Strategy for Carbon Emission Reduction-Evidence from Pilot Enterprises in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Xiao Yang & Wen Jia & Kedan Wang & Geng Peng, 2024. "Does the National Carbon Emissions Trading Market Promote Corporate Environmental Protection Investment? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, January.
    17. Lei, Pengfei & Cai, Qihai & Jiang, Fangxin, 2024. "Assessing the impact of environmental regulation on enterprise high-quality development in China: A two-tier stochastic frontier model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    18. Victor Ajayi & Geoffroy Dolphin & Karim Anaya & Michael Pollitt, 2020. "The Productivity Puzzle in Network Industries: Evidence from the Energy Sector," Working Papers EPRG2021, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    19. Peng, Jiaying & Xie, Rui & Ma, Chunbo & Fu, Yang, 2021. "Market-based environmental regulation and total factor productivity: Evidence from Chinese enterprises," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 394-407.
    20. Erik Hille & Patrick Möbius, 2019. "Environmental Policy, Innovation, and Productivity Growth: Controlling the Effects of Regulation and Endogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1315-1355, August.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12982-:d:938319. 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.