IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iwhdps/iwh-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Can Environmental Regulation of X-Ineffecient Firms Create a -Double Dividend-?

Author

Listed:
  • Klein, Martin
  • Rothfels, Jacqueline

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Klein, Martin & Rothfels, Jacqueline, 1999. "Can Environmental Regulation of X-Ineffecient Firms Create a -Double Dividend-?," IWH Discussion Papers 103/1999, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iwhdps:iwh-103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/77007/1/103.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kamecke, Ulrich, 1993. "The role of competition for an X-inefficiently organized firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 391-405, September.
    2. Xepapadeas, Anastasios & de Zeeuw, Aart, 1999. "Environmental Policy and Competitiveness: The Porter Hypothesis and the Composition of Capital," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 165-182, March.
    3. Simpson, R. David & Bradford, Robert III, 1996. "Taxing Variable Cost: Environmental Regulation as Industrial Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 282-300, May.
    4. 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.
    5. Rauscher, Michael, 1997. "International Trade, Factor Movements, and the Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290506.
    6. Ulph, Alistair, 1996. "Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 265-281, May.
    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. repec:dgr:umamer:2005008 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kriechel, Ben & Ziesemer, Thomas, 2003. "The Environmental Porter Hypothesis as a Technology Adoption Problem?," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    3. Ben Kriechel & Thomas Ziesemer, 2009. "The environmental Porter hypothesis: theory, evidence, and a model of timing of adoption," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 267-294.
    4. repec:ner:maastr:urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-19334 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:dgr:unumer:2007024 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:dgr:umamer:2003011 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ziesemer, Thomas & Kriechel, Ben, 2006. "Taxation and Technology Adoption: A Hotelling Approach," MERIT Working Papers 2006-009, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    8. Rothfels, Jacqueline, 2000. "Environmental policy under product differentiation and asymmetric costs - Does Leapfrogging occur and is it worth it?," IWH Discussion Papers 124/2000, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).

    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. J. Neary, 2006. "International Trade and the Environment: Theoretical and Policy Linkages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(1), pages 95-118, January.
    2. Rothfels, Jacqueline, 2000. "Environmental policy under product differentiation and asymmetric costs - Does Leapfrogging occur and is it worth it?," IWH Discussion Papers 124/2000, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    3. Shunsuke Managi & SJames J. Opaluch & Di Jin & Thomas A. Grigalunas, 2005. "Environmental Regulations and Technological Change in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Prabal Roy Chowdhury, 2011. "The Porter hypothesis and hyperbolic discounting," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(1), pages 167-176.
    7. Ben Kriechel & Thomas Ziesemer, 2009. "The environmental Porter hypothesis: theory, evidence, and a model of timing of adoption," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 267-294.
    8. Marcus Wagner & Nguyen Van Phu & Théophile Azomahou & Walter Wehrmeyer, 2002. "The relationship between the environmental and economic performance of firms: an empirical analysis of the European paper industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 133-146, September.
    9. Earnhart, Dietrich & Germeshausen, Robert & von Graevenitz, Kathrine, 2022. "Effects of information-based regulation on financial outcomes: Evidence from the European Union's public emission registry," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-015, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. 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.
    11. Kriechel, Ben & Ziesemer, Thomas, 2003. "The Environmental Porter Hypothesis as a Technology Adoption Problem?," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    12. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2005. "Can Environmental Regulations be Good for Business? an Assessment of the Porter Hypothesis," Cahiers de recherche 0505, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    13. Timothy Swanson & Zacharias Ziegelhoefer, 2011. "Economic Frameworks for thinking about Growth, Sustainability and the role of State Intervention: Paths to Green Economies?," CIES Research Paper series 11-2012, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    14. Brännlund, Runar, 2008. "Productivity and environmental regulations - A long run analysis of the Swedish industry," Umeå Economic Studies 728, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    15. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    16. Dietrich Earnhart & Dylan G. Rassier, 2016. "“Effective regulatory stringency” and firms’ profitability: the effects of effluent limits and government monitoring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 111-145, October.
    17. Rassier, Dylan G. & Earnhart, Dietrich, 2015. "Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 129-140.
    18. Hamamoto, Mitsutsugu, 2006. "Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 299-312, November.
    19. Li, Hong & Huang, Chengming & Yang, Bill Z., 2011. "Environmental Regulation, Business Innovation and International Competitiveness - Regolazione ambientale, innovazioni d’impresa e competitività internazionale," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 64(1), pages 115-128.
    20. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal & Peter Nijkamp, 2008. "The Impact of Innovation on a Polluting Firm's Regulation Driven Decision to Upgrade Its Capital Stock," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 389-403, October.

    More about this item

    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:zbw:iwhdps:iwh-103. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwhhhde.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.