IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v12y2022i4p21582440221129257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Regulation and the Innovation Performance of Chinese Export Firms: A Quasi-Natural Experiment based on the Law of Promoting Cleaner Production

Author

Listed:
  • Liang Ding
  • Yingna Wu
  • Yuetong Ma
  • Li Zhang

Abstract

As China’s export products have been pollution-intensive in recent decades, stringent environmental regulations have been applied to export products. Environmental regulation will squeeze out a firm’s expense on innovation and impact its productivity through the cost effect and innovation offset effect. However, the overall impact on productivity change is uncertain because of the trade-off between the two effects. This study explores the relationship between the innovations of export firms and environmental regulation using the panel data of export firms in 18 industrial industries. The impact of the implementation of the Law of Promoting Cleaner Production on the innovation of export firms in industries with different pollution intensities has been studied using the difference-in-differences method. The findings show that environmental regulation has a negative impact on the innovation of export firms. Export destinations create a difference in innovation performance. Environmental regulation tends to have a positive impact on the innovation of firms whose major markets are developed countries. Compared with light pollution-intensive industries, the Law of Promoting Cleaner Production has reduced the innovation ability of export firms in heavy and medium pollution-intensive industries. Therefore, when formulating environmental policies, regulators should consider the impact of such policies on the innovation of export enterprises and formulate a reasonable intensity of environmental regulations to achieve a win–win situation vis-à -vis improving the ecological environment and enhancing the innovation ability of export enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Liang Ding & Yingna Wu & Yuetong Ma & Li Zhang, 2022. "Environmental Regulation and the Innovation Performance of Chinese Export Firms: A Quasi-Natural Experiment based on the Law of Promoting Cleaner Production," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:4:p:21582440221129257
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440221129257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440221129257
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440221129257?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allen Blackman & Arne Kildegaard, 2010. "Clean technological change in developing-country industrial clusters: Mexican leather tanning," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 12(3), pages 115-132, September.
    2. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    3. Michael Greenstone & John A. List & Chad Syverson, 2011. "The Effects of Environmental Regulation on the Competiveness of U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 11-03, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    4. Eli Berman & Linda T. M. Bui, 2001. "Environmental Regulation And Productivity: Evidence From Oil Refineries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 498-510, August.
    5. Paul Lanoie & Jérémy Laurent‐Lucchetti & Nick Johnstone & Stefan Ambec, 2011. "Environmental Policy, Innovation and Performance: New Insights on the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 803-842, September.
    6. Jan F. Weiss & Tatiana Anisimova, 2019. "The innovation and performance effects of well-designed environmental regulation: evidence from Sweden," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(5), pages 534-567, May.
    7. Kyle Handley & Nuno Limão, 2013. "Policy Uncertainty, Trade and Welfare: Theory and Evidence for China and the U.S," NBER Working Papers 19376, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Jevan Cherniwchan & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2017. "Trade and the Environment: New Methods, Measurements, and Results," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 59-85, September.
    9. Adam B. Jaffe & Karen Palmer, 1997. "Environmental Regulation And Innovation: A Panel Data Study," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 610-619, November.
    10. David Greenaway & Richard Kneller, 2007. "Firm heterogeneity, exporting and foreign direct investment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(517), pages 134-161, February.
    11. Paula Bustos, 2011. "Trade Liberalization, Exports, and Technology Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinian Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 304-340, February.
    12. Popp, David & Hafner, Tamara & Johnstone, Nick, 2011. "Environmental policy vs. public pressure: Innovation and diffusion of alternative bleaching technologies in the pulp industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1253-1268.
    13. Zhenyu Jiang & Zongjun Wang & Yanqi Zeng, 2020. "Can voluntary environmental regulation promote corporate technological innovation?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 390-406, February.
    14. Grossman, Gene M. & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Trade, knowledge spillovers, and growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(2-3), pages 517-526, April.
    15. Claire Brunel & Arik Levinson, 2013. "Measuring Environmental Regulatory Stringency," Working Papers gueconwpa~13-13-02, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
    16. Gollop, Frank M & Roberts, Mark J, 1983. "Environmental Regulations and Productivity Growth: The Case of Fossil-Fueled Electric Power Generation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(4), pages 654-674, August.
    17. 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.
    18. Lee G. Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley, 2006. "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U. S. Firm-Level Panel Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(1), pages 321-349.
    19. Taylor, M Scott, 1994. "TRIPs, Trade, and Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 361-381, May.
    20. M. Scott Taylor, 1993. "TRIPS, Trade, and Technology Transfer," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(3), pages 625-637, August.
    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. Joanna Bednarz & Carola Schuster & Martin Rost, 2023. "Impact of Industry 4.0 Technology on International Posting of Workers," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, 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. Rassier, Dylan G. & Earnhart, Dietrich, 2015. "Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 129-140.
    2. Rubashkina, Yana & Galeotti, Marzio & Verdolini, Elena, 2015. "Environmental regulation and competitiveness: Empirical evidence on the Porter Hypothesis from European manufacturing sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 288-300.
    3. He, Yiqing & Ding, Xin & Yang, Chuchu, 2021. "Do environmental regulations and financial constraints stimulate corporate technological innovation? Evidence from China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    4. Wang, Yan & Shen, Neng, 2016. "Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 758-766.
    5. 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.
    6. Zhuanlan Sun & Demi Zhu, 2023. "Investigating environmental regulation effects on technological innovation: A meta-regression analysis," Energy & Environment, , vol. 34(3), pages 463-492, May.
    7. Mian Yang & Yining Yuan & Fuxia Yang & Dalia Patino-Echeverri, 2021. "Effects of environmental regulation on firm entry and exit and China’s industrial productivity: a new perspective on the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(4), pages 915-944, October.
    8. Ding, Jinxiu & Lu, Zhe & Yu, Chin-Hsien, 2022. "Environmental information disclosure and firms’ green innovation: Evidence from China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 147-159.
    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. Chakraborty, Pavel & Chakrabarti, Anindya S. & Chatterjee, Chirantan, 2023. "Cross-border environmental regulation and firm labor demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    11. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Misato Sato, 2017. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Competitiveness," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 183-206.
    12. Ankai Xu, 2016. "Environmental regulations and competitiveness: evidence based on Chinese firm data," CIES Research Paper series 47-2016, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    13. Ren, Shenggang & Yang, Xuanyu & Hu, Yucai & Chevallier, Julien, 2022. "Emission trading, induced innovation and firm performance," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    14. Antonietti, Roberto & Marzucchi, Alberto, 2014. "Green tangible investment strategies and export performance: A firm-level investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 150-161.
    15. Wang, Chunhua & Wu, JunJie & Zhang, Bing, 2018. "Environmental regulation, emissions and productivity: Evidence from Chinese COD-emitting manufacturers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 54-73.
    16. 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.
    17. Roberto Antonietti & Alberto Marzucchi, 2013. "Green Investment Strategies and Export Performance: A Firm-level Investigation," Working Papers 2013.76, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Johan Brolund & Robert Lundmark, 2017. "Effect of Environmental Regulation Stringency on the Pulp and Paper Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Lu, Yunguo & Zhang, Lin, 2022. "National mitigation policy and the competitiveness of Chinese firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Nusrate Aziz & Belayet Hossain & Laura Lamb, 2022. "Does green policy pay dividends?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 24(2), pages 147-172, April.

    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:sae:sagope:v:12:y:2022:i:4:p:21582440221129257. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.