How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena M. D’Agostino
2021 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-199
Author(s):  
Claudia Ranocchia ◽  
Luca Lambertini

AbstractThe Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis seem to predict opposite reactions by firms facing environmental regulation, as the first invokes the arising of a win–win solution while the second envisages the possibility for firms to flee abroad. We illustrate the possibility of designing policies (taking the form of either emission taxation or environmental standards) able to eliminate firms’ incentives to relocate their plants abroad and create a parallel incentive for them to deliver a win–win solution by investing either in replacement technologies under emission taxation, or in abatement technologies under an environmental standard. This is worked out in a Cournot supergame in which firms may activate the highest level of collusion compatible with their intertemporal preferences.


2018 ◽  
Vol 202 ◽  
pp. 993-1000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Yang ◽  
Huanxiu Guo ◽  
Beibei Liu ◽  
Rui Shi ◽  
Bing Zhang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (02) ◽  
pp. 301-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
DONGMEI TU ◽  
YAO LI ◽  
YONG ZENG

This study investigates the impact of stricter environmental regulation on export exit behavior of Chinese manufacturing firms from 1998 to 2009. After controlling heterogeneous firm, we find that (i) on average, the stricter regulation has not significantly caused more export exit; (ii) under stricter policy, foreign invested pure (or pollution intensive) exporters are not more likely to exit export than domestic pure (or pollution intensive) exporters; (iii) only weak evidence supports the pollution haven hypothesis for domestic pure exporters. All our robustness checks such as difference in difference analysis, different regulation measurement, and matched firm analysis show similar results.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 749-773
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fisher

There is considerable concern and debate about the economic impacts of environmental regulations. Jonathan Fisher, former Economics Manager at the Environment Agency in England and Wales, reviews the available evidence on this subject. Section 2 presents estimates of the costs and benefits of environmental regulations. Section 3 examines the impacts of environmental regulations on economic growth, innovation and technical change as well as impacts on competitiveness and any movement of businesses to less pollution havens. He questions call for greater certainty regarding future environmental regulations, whereas in fact there should be calls for less uncertainty. This section then suggests how this could be achieved. This section then finishes with an overview of the available evidence. This includes an examination of the Porter Hypothesis that environmental regulations can trigger greater innovation that may partially or more than fully offset the compliance costs. Section 4 then sets out principles for how better environmental regulation can improve its impacts on sustainable economic growth and illustrates how the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive is a good example of the application of these principles in practice. Section 5 reviews current and recent political perspectives regarding developments in environmental regulations across the EU and shows how the United Kingdom (UK) has successfully positively managed to influence such developments so that EU environmental regulations now incorporate many of these principles to improve their impacts on economic growth. Section 5.1 then examines the implications of Brexit for UK environmental regulations. Finally, Section 6 sets out some best practice principles to improve the impacts of environmental regulation on sustainable economic growth, innovation and technical change.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document