IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v9y2016i2p181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Linkages between Environmental Policy Instruments and Innovation: A Case Study of End-of-Life Vehicles Technologies in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Rajeev Singh
  • Helmut Yabar
  • Rie Murakami-Suzuki
  • Noriko Nozaki
  • Randeep Rakwal

Abstract

Environmental policies are designed to deal with externalities either by internalizing environmental costs or imposing specific standards for environmental pollution. This study aims to examine the impact of environmental regulations related to End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV) on innovation in Japan. We determined whether there is any statistical difference in patent activity comparing the periods before and after the regulations were enacted. In order to control for exogenous factors such as business cycles, we also analyzed the ratios of ELV and total environmental patents during the same periods. Results showed that environmental regulations drive innovations and the number of ELV-related patents were larger even after controlling for such exogenous factors. We concluded that environmental policy for ELV in Japan was effective in inducing innovation. However, we also found that the weakness in these types of command and control policy is the lack of incentives for further innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajeev Singh & Helmut Yabar & Rie Murakami-Suzuki & Noriko Nozaki & Randeep Rakwal, 2016. "Analysis of Linkages between Environmental Policy Instruments and Innovation: A Case Study of End-of-Life Vehicles Technologies in Japan," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(2), pages 181-181, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:9:y:2016:i:2:p:181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/56272/31383
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/56272
    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. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    3. Popp, David, 2006. "International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and Germany," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 46-71, January.
    4. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    5. Popp, David, 2005. "Lessons from patents: Using patents to measure technological change in environmental models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 209-226, August.
    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. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Nicolò Barbieri & Claudia Ghisetti & Marianna Gilli & Giovanni Marin & Francesco Nicolli, 2016. "A Survey Of The Literature On Environmental Innovation Based On Main Path Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 596-623, July.
    2. Cameron Hepburn & Jacquelyn Pless & David Popp, 2018. "Policy Brief—Encouraging Innovation that Protects Environmental Systems: Five Policy Proposals," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 154-169.
    3. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    4. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2019. "Academic Inventors and the Antecedents of Green Technologies. A Regional Analysis of Italian Patent Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 247-263.
    5. Triguero, Angela & Moreno-Mondéjar, Lourdes & Davia, María A., 2014. "The influence of energy prices on adoption of clean technologies and recycling: Evidence from European SMEs," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 246-257.
    6. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Giovanni Marin & Elena Paglialunga, 2016. "Eco-innovation, sustainable supply chains and environmental performance in European industries," LEM Papers Series 2016/19, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Hille, Erik & Althammer, Wilhelm & Diederich, Henning, 2020. "Environmental regulation and innovation in renewable energy technologies: Does the policy instrument matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Barbieri, Nicolò, 2015. "Investigating the impacts of technological position and European environmental regulation on green automotive patent activity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 140-152.
    9. Takahiko Kiso, 2019. "Environmental Policy and Induced Technological Change: Evidence from Automobile Fuel Economy Regulations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(2), pages 785-810, October.
    10. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco, 2008. "Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 447-460, June.
    11. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert & Sam, Abdoul G., 2013. "Do voluntary pollution reduction programs (VPRs) spur or deter environmental innovation? Evidence from 33/50," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 444-459.
    12. Popp, David, 2012. "The role of technological change in green growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6239, The World Bank.
    13. 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).
    14. Zhang, Dan & Zheng, Mingbo & Feng, Gen-Fu & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2022. "Does an environmental policy bring to green innovation in renewable energy?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 1113-1124.
    15. Keishiro Hara & Michinori Uwasu & Hideki Kobayashi & Shuji Kurimoto & Shinsuke Yamanaka & Yoshiyuki Shimoda & Yasushi Umeda, 2012. "Enhancing Meso Level Research in Sustainability Science—Challenges and Research Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(8), pages 1-15, August.
    16. Anja Deelen, 2011. "Wage-Tenure Profiles and Mobility," CPB Discussion Paper 198.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Joëlle Noailly & Svetlana Batrakova & Ruslan Lukach, 2010. "Home green home; a case study of inducing energy-efficient innovations in the Dutch building sector," CPB Document 198.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    18. Kim, Yeong Jae & Brown, Marilyn, 2019. "Impact of domestic energy-efficiency policies on foreign innovation: The case of lighting technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 539-552.
    19. Chen, Yufeng & Ma, Yanbai, 2021. "Does green investment improve energy firm performance?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    20. Claudia Ghisetti & Francesco Quatraro, 2014. "Is green knowledge improving environmental productivity? Sectoral Evidence from Italian Regions," SEEDS Working Papers 1014, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:9:y:2016:i:2:p:181. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.