IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4204-d182863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Governmentality the Missing Link for Greening the Economic Growth?

Author

Listed:
  • Janaka Siyambalapitiya

    (Department of Enterprise Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, No. 02, Linggong Road, Dalian 116024, China
    Faculty of Management, Department of Management Sciences, Uva Wellassa University of Sri Lanka, Passara Road, Badulla 90000, Sri Lanka)

  • Xu Zhang

    (Department of Enterprise Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, No. 02, Linggong Road, Dalian 116024, China)

  • Xiaobing Liu

    (Department of Enterprise Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, No. 02, Linggong Road, Dalian 116024, China)

Abstract

The new concept of “green growth” appears to be an economic growth model, which balances environment sustainability and fostering of economic growth. Yet, much of the green growth research has failed to address the real extent of interconnections and complexity of the relationship between governance and economic, social, and environmental structures. Furthermore, current green growth research tends to focus on the country level, such as the Millennium Development Goals and sustainable development indices, which risks ignoring the additional impacts on micro industrial economies. The lack of connection between green growth and good governance—known as environmental governance—is a crucial gap in practical adoption. Therefore, this study uses Foucault’s governmentality lens to view green growth as a technique of government, seeking an environmentally focused eco-governmentality. We examine the transformation, differential definitions, and critical dimensions of green growth in relation to particular case studies taken from China and South Korea and frame them for future sustainable studies. The findings of this study highlight the significant role of interdisciplinary research, as well both bottom-up and top-down initiatives, on enabling the transition to green growth. The proposed research framework and implementation strategy also identifies new avenues for future research and practices in the field of sustainable development, making it one of the study’s key contributions to the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Janaka Siyambalapitiya & Xu Zhang & Xiaobing Liu, 2018. "Is Governmentality the Missing Link for Greening the Economic Growth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4204-:d:182863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4204/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4204/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2002. "A theoretical foundation of the Porter hypothesis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 355-360, May.
    3. 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.
    4. Walter R. Stahel, 2016. "The circular economy," Nature, Nature, vol. 531(7595), pages 435-438, March.
    5. Yongsheng Zhang, 2014. "Climate Change and Green Growth: A Perspective of the Division of Labor," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 22(5), pages 93-116, September.
    6. Alan Murray & Keith Skene & Kathryn Haynes, 2017. "The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 369-380, February.
    7. Lamia Kamal-Chaoui & Fabio Grazi & Jongwan Joo & Marissa Plouin, 2011. "The Implementation of the Korean Green Growth Strategy in Urban Areas," OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2011/2, OECD Publishing.
    8. Yannick Glemarec & Jose A. Puppim de Oliveira, 2012. "The Role Of The Visible Hand Of Public Institutions In Creating A Sustainable Future," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(3), pages 200-214, August.
    9. Gisselquist, Rachel M., 2012. "Good Governance as a Concept, and Why This Matters for Development Policy," WIDER Working Paper Series 030, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-30 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Rachel M. Gisselquist, 2012. "Good Governance as a Concept, and Why This Matters for Development Policy," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-030, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    12. Begum, Rawshan Ara & Sohag, Kazi & Abdullah, Sharifah Mastura Syed & Jaafar, Mokhtar, 2015. "CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic and population growth in Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 594-601.
    13. Caroline Scott, 2011. "Governmentality And Strategic Environmental Assessment: Challenging The Sea/Good Governance Nexus," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(01), pages 67-100.
    14. Plambeck, Erica L., 2012. "Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through operations and supply chain management," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(S1), pages 64-74.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alejandro Padilla-Rivera & Sara Russo-Garrido & Nicolas Merveille, 2020. "Addressing the Social Aspects of a Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Rocío González-Sánchez & Davide Settembre-Blundo & Anna Maria Ferrari & Fernando E. García-Muiña, 2020. "Main Dimensions in the Building of the Circular Supply Chain: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-25, March.
    3. Verena Rodorff & Marianna Siegmund-Schultze & Maike Guschal & Sonja Hölzl & Johann Köppel, 2019. "Good Governance: A Framework for Implementing Sustainable Land Management, Applied to an Agricultural Case in Northeast-Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    4. Alejandro Balanzo & Leonardo Garavito & Héctor Rojas & Lenka Sobotova & Oscar Pérez & Diego Guaquetá & Alejandro Mojica & Juan Pavajeau & Sebastián Sanabria, 2020. "Typical Challenges of Governance for Sustainable Regional Development in Globalized Latin America: A Multidimensional Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, March.

    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. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Jean Pierre Huiban & Camille Mastromarco & Antonio Musolesi & Michel Simioni, 2016. "The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: new insights from frontier analysis," Working Papers hal-01512154, HAL.
    3. Eric Giraud-Héraud & Jean-Pierre Ponssard & Bernard Sinclair Desgagné & Louis-Georges Soler, 2016. "The agro-food industry, public health, and environmental protection: investigating the Porter hypothesis in food regulation," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 127-140, September.
    4. Indrani Roy Chowdhury & Sandwip K. Das, 2011. "Environmental regulation, green R&D and the Porter hypothesis," Indian Growth and Development Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(2), pages 142-152, September.
    5. Wen, Shiyan & Jia, Zhijie, 2022. "The energy, environment and economy impact of coal resource tax, renewable investment, and total factor productivity growth," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Kozluk, Tomasz & Kruse, Tobias & Nachtigall, Daniel & de Serres, Alain, 2019. "Do Environmental and Economic Performance Go Together? A Review of Micro-level Empirical Evidence from the Past Decade or So," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 13(1-2), pages 1-118, April.
    7. Qiu, Larry D. & Zhou, Mohan & Wei, Xu, 2018. "Regulation, innovation, and firm selection: The porter hypothesis under monopolistic competition," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 638-658.
    8. Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf & Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Clean and productive? Empirical evidence from the German manufacturing industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 442-451.
    9. Jean Pierre Huiban & Camilla Mastromarco & Antonio Musolesi & Michel Simioni, 2018. "Reconciling the Porter hypothesis with the traditional paradigm about environmental regulation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 85-100, December.
    10. Pang, Yu, 2018. "Profitable pollution abatement? A worker productivity perspective," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 33-49.
    11. Rexhäuser, Sascha & Rammer, Christian, 2011. "Unmasking the Porter hypothesis: Environmental innovations and firm-profitability," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-036, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. André, Francisco J., 2015. "Strategic Effects and the Porter Hypothesis," MPRA Paper 62237, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Gonseth, Camille & Cadot, Olivier & Mathys, Nicole A. & Thalmann, Philippe, 2015. "Energy-tax changes and competitiveness: The role of adaptive capacity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 127-135.
    14. Luca Lambertini & Giuseppe Pignataro & Alessandro Tampieri, 2022. "Competition among coalitions in a cournot industry: a validation of the porter hypothesis," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 679-713, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Jean Pierre Huiban & Camilla Mastromarco & Antonio Musolesi & Michel Simioni, 2018. "The impact of pollution abatement investments on production technology: a nonparametric approach," SEEDS Working Papers 0918, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Sep 2018.
    17. Sascha Rexhäuser & Christian Rammer, 2014. "Environmental Innovations and Firm Profitability: Unmasking the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 145-167, January.
    18. Chakraborty, Pavel & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2017. "Does environmental regulation indirectly induce upstream innovation? New evidence from India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 939-955.
    19. Yunguo Lu & Lin Zhang, 2023. "Environmental information disclosure and firm production: evidence from the estimated efficiency of publicly listed firms in China," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 99-119, February.
    20. 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.

    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:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4204-:d:182863. 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.