Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Eurasian Business Review
Published in: Eurasian Business Review 2/2015

01-12-2015 | Original Paper

Environmental and innovation policies for the evolution of green technologies: a survey and a test

Authors: Francesco Crespi, Claudia Ghisetti, Francesco Quatraro

Published in: Eurasian Business Review | Issue 2/2015

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide an updated survey of the “state of the art” in environmental policies, with a particular focus on those policies fostering the generation, diffusion and exploitation of technologies improving environmental performances, i.e. eco-innovations. In particular, we provide a critical appraisal of the existing policy schemes, by emphasizing how the demarcation between environmental and technology policies gets more and more blurred. The case for a systemic approach to the implementation of policy measures is finally discussed. Econometric evidence about the importance of environmental policies is also provided in the “Appendix”.
previous article The impact of the global financial crisis on cross-border mergers and acquisitions: a continental and industry analysis
next article Effect of women’s labor market status on online grocery shopping, the case of Turkey

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
ETS stands for European Trading System, working on a ‘cap and trade’ principle. For more information on this policy scheme the reader can look at the European Union website http://​ec.​europa.​eu/​clima/​policies/​ets/​index_​en.​htm
 
2
Soft loans are low rate or interest-free loans provided by financial institutions to favor the acquisition of item that help the transition towards sustainability. An example of such loans is providing households with loans aimed at purchasing or installing items recommended for their home to be sustainable.
 
Literature
Alt, J., Preston, I., & Sibieta, L. (2010). The political economy of tax policy. In J. Mirrlees, S. Adam, T. Besley, R. Blundell, S. Bond, R. Chote, M. Gammie, P. Johnson, G. Myles, & J. Poterba (Eds.), Dimensions of tax design: The mirrlees review (pp. 1204–1279). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ambec, S., Cohen, M. A., Elgie, S., & Lanoie, P. (2013). The Porter hypothesis at 20: Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 016.
Antonelli, C., & Crespi, F. (2013). The Matthew effect in R&D public subsidies: The case of Italy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80, 1523–1534.CrossRef
Arrow, K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In Universities-National Bureau (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors (pp. 609–626). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Beise, M., & Rennings, K. (2005). Lead markets and regulation: A framework for analyzing the international diffusion of environmental innovations. Ecological Economics, 52, 5–17.CrossRef
Berman, E., & Bui, L. T. M. (2001). Environmental Regulation and productivity: Evidence from oil refineries. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(3), 498–510.CrossRef
Binswanger, M. (2001). Technological progress and sustainable development: What about the rebound effect? Ecological Economics, 36(1), 119–132.CrossRef
Bloom, N., Griffith, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2002). Do R&D tax credits work? Evidence from a panel of countries 1979–1997. Journal of Public Economics, 85(1), 1–31.CrossRef
Böhringer, C., Löschel, A., Moslener, U., & Rutherford, T. F. (2009). EU climate policy up to 2020: An economic impact assessment. Energy Economics, 31, S295–S305.CrossRef
Borghesi, S., Cainelli, G., & Mazzanti, M. (2012). European emission trading scheme and environmental innovation: An empirical analysis using CIS data for Italy. Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia, 71(1), 71–97.
Borghesi, S., Crespi F., D’Amato A., Mazzanti, M., Silvestri, F. (2015). Carbon abatement, sector heterogeneity and policy responses: Evidence on induced eco innovations in the EU, Environmental Science and Policy, forthcoming.
Brunnermeier, S., & Cohen, M. (2003). Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45, 278–293.MATHCrossRef
Brunnermeier, S. B., & Levinson, A. (2004). Examining the evidence on environmental regulations and industry location. The Journal of Environment and Development, 13(1), 6–41.CrossRef
Calel, R., & Dechezleprêtre, A. (2014). Environmental policy and directed technological change: Evidence from the European carbon market. Review of economics and statistics. doi:10.​1162/​REST_​a_​00470.
Cecere, G., Corrocher, N., Gossart, C., & Ozman, M. (2014). Lock-in and path dependence : An evolutionary approach to eco-innovations. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24, 1037–1065.CrossRef
Costantini, V., & Crespi, F. (2008). Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies. Ecological Economics, 66(2–3), 447–460.CrossRef
Costantini, V., & Crespi, F. (2013). Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: Regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 23(2), 401–429.CrossRef
Costantini, V., Crespi, F., Martini, C., & Pennacchio, L. (2015). Demand-pull and technology-push public support for eco-innovation: The case of the biofuels sector. Research Policy, 44(3), 577–595.CrossRef
Crespi, F., & Quatraro, F. (2013). Systemic technology policies: Issues and instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80, 1447–1449.CrossRef
Crespi, F., & Quatraro, F. (2015). The economics of knowledge, innovation and systemic technology policy. London and New York: Routledge.
David, P. A., & Hall, B. H. (2000). Heart of darkness: Modeling public–private funding interactions inside the R&D black box. Research Policy, 29(9), 1165–1183.CrossRef
David, P. A., Hall, B. H., & Toole, A. A. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research Policy, 29(4), 497–529.CrossRef
De Serres, A., Llewellyn, J., & Llewellyn, P. (2011). The political economy of climate change mitigation policies. OECD working paper 887.
De Serres, A., Murtin, F., & Nicoletti, G. (2010). A framework for assessing green growth policies. OECD Economics department working paper series, no. 774.
De Vries, F., & Medhi, N. (2008). Environmental regulation and international innovation in automotive emissions control technologies. In Environmental policy, technological innovation and patents, OECD studies on environmental innovation (pp. 63–96). Paris: OECD.
Dechezleprêtre, A., Glachant, M., & Ménière, Y. (2008). The clean development mechanism and the international diffusion of technologies: An empirical study. Energy Policy, 36(4), 1273–1283.CrossRef
Del Río, P., Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., & Könnölä, T. (2010). Policy strategies to promote eco-innovation. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 14(4), 541–557.CrossRef
EC. (2008). Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and Council amending directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse emission allowance trading system of the Community, COM (2008) 16 final, dated 23 Jan 2008.
EC. (2010a). Europe 2020 flagship initiative innovation union, communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, COM(2010) 546, Brussels.
EC. (2010b). EUROPE 2020 a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, COM (2010) 2020, Brussels.
EC. (2012). Annual growth survey 2012—Annex: Growth-friendly tax policies in member states and better tax coordination in the EU, communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions, Vol. 5/5 Annex IV, COM (2011) 815 final, Brussels.
EC. (2013). Tax reforms in EU member states 2013. Tax policy challenges for economic growth and fiscal sustainability, European Economy 5/2013, Brussels.
EC. (2014). Energy economic developments in Europe, European economy 1/2014, Directorate-general for economic and financial affairs, Brussels.
Edquist, C. (2001). Innovation policy: A systemic approach. In D. Archibugi & B.-Å. Lundvall (Eds.), The globalizing learning economy (pp. 219–237). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
EEA. (2005). Market-based instruments for environmental policy in Europe, Technical report No 8/2005. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
EEA. (2011). Environmental tax reform in Europe: opportunities for eco-innovation, Technical report No 17/2011. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
EEA. (2014). Resource-efficient green economy and EU policies. European Environment Agency Report p. 2, Copenhagen.
Ekins, P. (2010). Eco-innovation for environmental sustainability: Concepts, progress and policies. International Economics and Economic Policy, 7, 267–290.CrossRef
Ekins, P., & Venn, A. (2006). Assessing innovation dynamics induced by environmental policy. London: Policy Studies Institute.
Flanagan, K., Uyarra, E., & Laranja, M. (2011). Reconceptualising the ‘policy mix’ for innovation. Research Policy, 40, 702–713.CrossRef
Georghiou, L., & Metcalfe, J. S. (1998). Equilibrium and evolutionary foundations of technology policy, STI review—Special issue on new rationale and approaches in technology and innovation policy (Vol. 22). Paris: OECD.
Ghisetti, C., Marzucchi, A., & Montresor, S. (2015). The open eco-innovation mode. An empirical investigation of eleven European countries. Research Policy, 44(5), 1080–1093.CrossRef
Ghisetti, C., & Quatraro, F. (2013). Beyond inducement in climate change: Does environmental performance spur environmental technologies? A regional analysis of cross-sectoral differences. Ecological Economics, 96, 99–113.CrossRef
Ghisetti, C., & Rennings, K. (2014). Environmental innovations and profitability: How does it pay to be green? An empirical analysis on the German Innovation survey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 75, 106–117.CrossRef
Gilli, M., Mazzanti, M., & Nicolli, F. (2013). Sustainability and competitiveness in evolutionary perspectives: Environmental innovations, structural change and economic dynamics in the EU. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 45, 204–215.CrossRef
Gray, W. B., & Shadbegian, R. J. (1998). Environmental Regulation, investment timing and technology choice. The Journal of Industrial Economics, XLVI(2), 235–256.
Greenstone, M. (2001). The impacts of environmental regulations on industrial activity: Evidence from the 1970 and 1977 clean air act amendments and the census of manufactures. NBER working paper no. 8484.
Grossman, G. (1991). Promoting new industrial activities: A survey of recent arguments and evidence. OECD Economic Studies, 14(1991), 87–125.ADS
Hahn, R. W. (1984). Market power and transferable property rights. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99(4), 753–765.CrossRef
Hall, B., & Van Reenen, J. (2000). How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence. Research Policy, 29(4), 449–469.CrossRef
Hintermann, B. (2011). Market power, permit allocation and efficiency in emission permit markets. Environmental and Resource Economics, 49, 327–349.CrossRef
Horbach, J., Rammer, C., & Rennings, K. (2012). Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact—The role of regulatory push/pull, technology push and market pull. Ecological Economics, 78, 112–122.CrossRef
Huppes, G. (2011) Instruments for effective global climate policy: The carbon deposit system. Presentation at the symposium “making climate policy a global reality: Instruments, mechanisms, consequences and policy process. University of Leiden, 16th Dec 2011.
Jaffe, A., Newell, R., & Stavins, R. (2002). Environmental policy and technological change. Environmental and Resource Economics, 22(1–2), 41–70.CrossRef
Jaffe, A., & Palmer, K. (1997). Environmental regulation and innovation: A panel data study. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4), 610–619.CrossRef
Jänicke, M., & Lindemann, S. (2010). Governing environmental innovations. Environmental Politics, 19(1), 127–141.CrossRef
Johnstone, N., Haščič, I., & Kalamova, M. (2010b). Environmental policy design characteristics and technological innovation. Evidence from patent data. OECD environment working paper no. 16.
Johnstone, N., Hašcic, I., Poirier, J., Hemar, M., & Michel, C. (2012). Environmental policy stringency and technological innovation : Evidence from survey data and patent counts. Applied Economics, 44(17), 2157–2170.CrossRef
Johnstone, N., Haščič, I., & Popp, D. (2010a). Renewable energy policies and technological innovation: Evidence based on patent counts. Environmental and Resource Economics, 45, 133–155.CrossRef
Kozluk, T., & Zipperer, V. (2013). Environmental policies and productivity growth OECD economics department working papers no. 1096, Paris.
Lanjouw, J., & Mody, A. (1996). Innovation and the international diffusion of environmentally responsive technology. Research Policy, 25, 549–571.CrossRef
Link, A. N. (1977). On the efficiency of federal R&D spending: A public choice approach. Public Choice, 31(1), 129–133.MathSciNetCrossRef
Martin, R., Muulus, M., De Preux, L. B., & Wagner, U. (2014a). Industry compensation under relocation risk: A firm-level analysis of the EU emissions trading scheme. American Economic Review, 104, 2482–2508.CrossRef
Martin, R., Muulus, M., De Preux, L. B., & Wagner, U. (2014b). On the empirical content of carbon leakage criteria in the EU emissions trading scheme. Ecological Economics, 105, 78–88.CrossRef
Mazzucato, M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking private vs. public sector myths. London: Anthem Press.
Metcalfe, J. S. (1995). Foundations of technology policy—Equilibrium and evolutionary perspectives. In P. Stoneman, P. Dasgupta, & R. Nelson (Eds.), Handbook in the economics of innovation. London: Blackwell.
Mohnen, P., & Röller, L. H. (2005). Complementarities in innovation policy. European Economic Review, 49(6), 1431–1450.CrossRef
Morley, B. (2012). Empirical evidence on the effectiveness of environmental taxes. Applied Economics Letters, 19(18), 1817–1820.CrossRef
Nelson, R. R. (1959). The economics of invention: A survey of the literature. The Journal of Business, 32(2), 101–127.CrossRef
Nesta, L., Vona, F., & Nicolli, F. (2014). Environmental policies, competition and innovation in renewable energy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 67(3), 369–411.CrossRef
OECD. (2007). Science, technology and industry scoreboard. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2010). Taxation, innovation and the environment, organisation for economic co-operation and development. Paris: OECD.
Oltra, V., & Saint Jean, M. (2009). Sectoral systems of environmental innovation : An application to the French automotive industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(4), 567–583.CrossRef
Palmer, K., Oates, W. E., & Portney, P. R. (1995). Tightening environmental standards : The benefit-cost or the no-cost paradigm ? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 119–132.CrossRef
Porter, M. E., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.CrossRef
Quitzow, R., Walz, R., Koehler, J., & Rennings, K. (2014). The concept of “lead markets” revisited. Contribution to environmental innovation theory. Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 10, 4–19.CrossRef
Rammel, C., & van der Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2003). Evolutionary policies for sustainable development: Adaptive flexibility and risk minimising. Ecological Economics, 47, 121–133.CrossRef
Rennings, K. (2000). Redefining innovation—Eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 32(2), 319–332.CrossRef
Rennings, K., & Rexhäuser, S. (2011). Long-term impacts of environmental policy and eco-innovative activities of firms. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 11(3/4), 274–290.CrossRef
Requate, T. (2005). Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments—A survey. Ecological Economics, 54, 175–195.CrossRef
Schmidt, T. S., Schneider, M., Rogge, K. S., Schuetz, M. J. A., & Hoffmann, V. O. (2012). The effects of climate policy on the rate and direction of innovation: A survey of the EU ETS and the electricity sector. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 2, 23–48.CrossRef
Stavins, R. N. (2003). Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments. In K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of environmental economics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 355–435.
Stiglitz, J. E., & Wallsten, S. J. (2000). Public-private technology partnerships—Promises and pitfalls. In P. Vaillancourt Rosenau (Ed.), Public-private policy partnerships (pp. 37–58). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Tollison, R. D. (1997). Rent seeking, Chapter 23. In D. C. Mueller (Ed.), Perspectives on public choice: A handbook. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2013). Technological forecasting and social change environmental and climate innovation: Limitations, policies and prices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(1), 11–23.MathSciNetCrossRef
Veugelers, R. (2012). Which policy instruments to induce clean innovating ? Research Policy, 41(10), 1770–1778.CrossRef
Vlachou, A. (2014). The European union’s emissions trading system. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38, 127–152.CrossRef
Wood, P. J., & Jotzo, F. (2011). Price floors for emissions trading. Energy Policy, 39(3), 1746–1753.CrossRef
Zetterberg, L. (2014). Benchmarking in the European Union emissions trading system : Abatement incentives. Energy Economics, 43, 218–224.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Environmental and innovation policies for the evolution of green technologies: a survey and a test
Authors
Francesco Crespi
Claudia Ghisetti
Francesco Quatraro
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Eurasian Business Review / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 1309-4297
Electronic ISSN: 2147-4281
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-015-0027-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

Eurasian Business Review 2/2015 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Innovation and export performance: do young and mature innovative firms differ?

Original Paper

Cameras tracking shoppers: the economics of retail video surveillance

Original Paper

The impact of the global financial crisis on cross-border mergers and acquisitions: a continental and industry analysis

Original Paper

The impact of deregulation on the movie box office after Taiwan’s entry into the WTO: the difference-in-differences estimation

Original Paper

Again on trade elasticities: evidence from a selected sample of countries

Original Paper

The impact of ownership structure and family board domination on voluntary disclosure for Jordanian listed companies