IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/357.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological changes in the pulp and paper industry and the role of uniform versus selective environmental policy

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Although environmental regulations may imply a cost increase on firm's conventional input factors, such regulations could stimulate the incentives to improve factor productivity. Productivity measures including indicators capturing environmental improvements may also show higher or lower progress than productivity measures ignoring environmental aspects. We apply a Malmquist productivity index approach on micro data for the Norwegian pulp and paper industry, and find that the overall productivity growth accounting for changes in emissions of COD to water is higher than the growth in the productivity measure including conventional inputs only. We find the opposite result when including emissions of acids and climate gases to air. This is probably due to environmental regulations with opposing effects on different emissions. A decomposition of the Malmquist index into a technical efficiency change factor and a technical change component shows that the frontier technology has changed, while the average distance to the frontier has increased.

Suggested Citation

  • Annegrete Bruvoll & Torstein Bye & Jan Larsson & Kjetil Telle, 2003. "Technological changes in the pulp and paper industry and the role of uniform versus selective environmental policy," Discussion Papers 357, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp357.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tor Jakob Klette, 1999. "Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 451-476, December.
    2. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Henry Tulkens & Philippe Eeckaut, 2006. "Non-Frontier Measures of Efficiency, Progress and Regress for Time Series Data," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 373-394, Springer.
    4. Tor Jakob Klette & Arvid Raknerud, 2002. "How and why do Firms differ?," Discussion Papers 320, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    5. repec:bla:scandj:v:96:y:1994:i:3:p:343-63 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Annegrete Bruvoll & Hege Medin, 2003. "Factors Behind the Environmental Kuznets Curve. A Decomposition of the Changes in Air Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(1), pages 27-48, January.
    7. Bovenberg, A Lans & van der Ploeg, Frederick, 1993. "Green Policies in a Small Open Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 785, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Forsund, Finn R. & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1980. "A survey of frontier production functions and of their relationship to efficiency measurement," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 5-25, May.
    9. repec:bla:scandj:v:85:y:1983:i:2:p:113-26 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Reinhard, Stijn & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Thijssen, Geert J., 2000. "Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 287-303, March.
    11. Runar Brännlund & Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 1995. "Environmental regulation and profitability: An application to Swedish pulp and paper mills," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 23-36, July.
    12. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    13. Hailu, Atakelty & Veeman, Terrence S., 2001. "Alternative methods for environmentally adjusted productivity analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 211-218, September.
    14. Daniel Tyteca, 1997. "Linear Programming Models for the Measurement of Environmental Performance of Firms—Concepts and Empirical Results," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 183-197, May.
    15. Berndt, Ernst R & Khaled, Mohammed S, 1979. "Parametric Productivity Measurement and Choice among Flexible Functional Forms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(6), pages 1220-1245, December.
    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. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2013. "Environmental performance, manufacturing sectors and firm growth: structural factors and dynamic relationships," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(4), pages 367-387, October.
    2. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Zoboli, Roberto, 2009. "Environmental efficiency and labour productivity: Trade-off or joint dynamics? A theoretical investigation and empirical evidence from Italy using NAMEA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1182-1194, February.
    3. Torstein Bye & Annegrete Bruvoll & Jan Larsson, 2009. "Capacity Utilization in a Generalized Malmquist Index Including Environmental Factors: A Decomposition Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 529-538.
    4. Telle, Kjetil & Larsson, Jan, 2007. "Do environmental regulations hamper productivity growth? How accounting for improvements of plants' environmental performance can change the conclusion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 438-445, March.
    5. Jan Larsson & Kjetil Telle, 2005. "Consequences of the IPPC-directive's BAT requirements for abatement costs and emissions," Discussion Papers 411, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    6. Alfredsson, Eva & Månsson, Jonas & Vikström, Peter, 2016. "Internalising external environmental effects in efficiency analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 22-31.
    7. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Zoboli, Roberto, 2007. "Environmental Efficiency, Emission Trends and Labour Productivity: Trade-Off or Joint Dynamics? Empirical Evidence Using NAMEA Panel Data," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 9320, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Borghesi, Simone & Cainelli, Giulio & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2012. "Brown Sunsets and Green Dawns in the Industrial Sector: Environmental Innovations, Firm Behavior and the European Emission Trading," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 121701, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. Jan Larsson & Kjetil Telle, 2008. "Consequences of the IPPC’s BAT Requirements for Emissions and Abatement Costs: A DEA Analysis on Norwegian Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(4), pages 563-578, December.
    10. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Simone Borghesi, 2012. "The European Emission Trading Scheme and environmental innovation diffusion: Empirical analyses using Italian CIS data," Working Papers 201201, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    11. Kjetil Telle & Jan Larsson, 2004. "Do environmental regulations hamper productivity growth? How accounting for improvements of firms' environmental performance can change the conclusion," Discussion Papers 374, Statistics Norway, Research Department.

    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. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2015. "Efficiency of the banking system in Vietnam under financial liberalization," OSF Preprints qsf6d, Center for Open Science.
    2. Soledad Moya & Jordi Perramon & Anselm Constans, 2005. "IFRS Adoption in Europe: The Case of Germany," Working Papers 0501, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Feb 2005.
    3. César Salazar & Roberto Cárdenas-Retamal & Marcela Jaime, 2023. "Environmental efficiency in the salmon industry—an exploratory analysis around the 2007 ISA virus outbreak and subsequent regulations in Chile," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8107-8135, August.
    4. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    5. Johan Couder & Aviel Verbruggen, 2003. "Technical Efficiency Measures as a Tool for Energy Benchmarking in Industry?," Energy & Environment, , vol. 14(5), pages 705-724, September.
    6. Hoang, Viet-Ngu & Coelli, Tim, 2011. "Measurement of agricultural total factor productivity growth incorporating environmental factors: A nutrients balance approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 462-474.
    7. Chebil, Ali & Frija, Iheb & Bahri, Walid, 2014. "Irrigation water efficiency in wheat production in Chbika (Tunisia):Parametric versus Nonparametric Comparisons," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14.
    8. Aparicio, Juan & Kapelko, Magdalena & Zofío, José L., 2020. "The measurement of environmental economic inefficiency with pollution-generating technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    9. Vaninsky, Alexander, 2010. "Prospective national and regional environmental performance: Boundary estimations using a combined data envelopment – stochastic frontier analysis approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3657-3665.
    10. Behrouz Arabi & Susila Munisamy Doraisamy & Ali Emrouznejad & Alireza Khoshroo, 2017. "Eco-efficiency measurement and material balance principle: an application in power plants Malmquist Luenberger Index," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 221-239, August.
    11. Riccardi, R. & Oggioni, G. & Toninelli, R., 2012. "Efficiency analysis of world cement industry in presence of undesirable output: Application of data envelopment analysis and directional distance function," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 140-152.
    12. Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Diego Prior, 2005. "Efficiency and Environmental Regulation: A "Complex Situation"," Working Papers 0502, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Feb 2005.
    13. Torstein Bye & Annegrete Bruvoll & Jan Larsson, 2009. "Capacity Utilization in a Generalized Malmquist Index Including Environmental Factors: A Decomposition Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 529-538.
    14. Munksgaard, Jesper & Christoffersen, Line Block & Keiding, Hans & Pedersen, Ole Gravgard & Jensen, Trine S., 2007. "An environmental performance index for products reflecting damage costs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 119-130, October.
    15. George Halkos & Nickolaos Tzeremes, 2014. "Measuring the effect of Kyoto protocol agreement on countries’ environmental efficiency in CO 2 emissions: an application of conditional full frontiers," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 367-382, June.
    16. Picazo-Tadeo, Andres J. & Reig-Martinez, Ernest & Hernandez-Sancho, Francesc, 2005. "Directional distance functions and environmental regulation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 131-142, June.
    17. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tsionas, Mike G., 2021. "Generalized estimation of productivity with multiple bad outputs: The importance of materials balance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1165-1186.
    18. Solveig Lothe & Ingunn Myrtveit, 2003. "Compensation systems for green strategy implementation: parametric and non‐parametric approaches," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 191-203, May.
    19. Brita Bye & Karine Nyborg, 1999. "The Welfare Effects of Carbon Policies: Grandfathered Quotas versus Differentiated Taxes," Discussion Papers 261, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    20. M. Lábaj & M. Luptáčik & E. Nežinský, 2014. "Data envelopment analysis for measuring economic growth in terms of welfare beyond GDP," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(3), pages 407-424, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emissions; Productivity change; Paper and pulp; Malmquist index; Frontier technology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L73 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Primary Products and Construction - - - Forest Products
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • R38 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ssb:dispap:357. 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.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.