Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
The Competitiveness of EU Member States from Central and Eastern Europe in 2007–2014 Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2016 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Policies to Promote Eco-innovation: Results for Selected CEE Countries and Germany

verfasst von : Małgorzata Stefania Lewandowska, PhD

Erschienen in: Competitiveness of CEE Economies and Businesses

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Eco-innovation should be identified as one of the main pillars for European countries, including those from the Central Eastern European (CEE) region. For this reason, the aim of this chapter is to present a comparative cross-country analysis of the relationship between eco-innovation and its main drivers for firms from selected CEE countries. The chapter provides a special insight into the role of public financial support and government regulations in stimulating eco-innovation performance. The empirical part is based on micro-data for CIS 2006–2008 for firms from Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Romania and Germany. The results of stepwise regression show that financial support for innovation activities has rather limited role in fostering eco-innovation, whereas existing environmental regulations are regarded by enterprises from CEE region as their most important driver. In Germany, country ranked higher in Eco-Innovation Scoreboard than the other above mentioned countries, the spectrum of equally important forces is much more enhanced. This leads to the conclusion that government efforts have to cover not only changes in existing environmental policies, but set the ground for the creation of a legal and institutional environment which promotes a model of green economy.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Attracting FDI to the New EU Member States
Nächstes Kapitel CEE Countries as a Business Process Outsourcing Destination
Fußnoten
1
The terms eco-innovation, environmental-friendly innovation, environmental innovation are used interchangeably in this chapter.
 
2
The indicators in the Eco-Innovation Scoreboard are divided into five components covering eco-innovation inputs (including early stage investments in clean technology), eco-innovation activities (such as the percentage of firms taking resource efficiency measures), eco-innovation outputs (such as relevant patents), resource efficiency performance, and socio-economic outputs (such as data on turnover, employment and exports); for more information see: http://​www.​eco-innovation.​eu.
 
3
The 2013 version of the Eco-IS consists of 16 indicators from 9 different data sources, which were the same indicators used for the 2012 version; 13 indicators were updated, with most indicators having their latest values for the years between 2010 and 2012; for more information see: http://​www.​eco-innovation.​eu.
 
4
CIS 2008 micro data for 16 European countries (namely: BG-CY-CZ-DE-EE-ES-HU-IE-LT-LV-PT-RO-SI-SK-NO) obtained based on the “Contract on the use of Community Innovation Survey (CIS) micro data for research purposes – CIS/2012/13” signed on 18.10.2012 between European Commission Eurostat, Unit B1 and the Warsaw School of Economics.
 
5
Results for Bulgarian, Czech Republic and German enterprises were very similar and are available on request from the corresponding author.
 
Literatur
Ambec, S., Cohen, M. A., Elgie, S., & Lanoie, P. (2011). The Porter hypothesis at 20: Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Discussion paper, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
Arrow, K. J. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In R. R. Nelson (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors (National Bureau of Economic Research, Conference Series, pp. 609–625). Princeton: 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(1), 5–17.CrossRef
Belin, J., Horbach, V., & Oltra, V. (2011). Determinants and specificities of eco-innovations – An econometric analysis for the French and German industry based on the Community Innovation Survey. Cahiers du GREThA, no. 2011–17.
Bloom, N., Griffith, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2002). Do R&D tax credit works? Evidence from a panel of countries 1979–1997. Journal of Public Economics, 85, 1–31.CrossRef
Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513–1522.CrossRef
Cace, C., Cace, S., & Nicolaescu, V. (2011). Absorption of the structural funds in Romania. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 2, 84–105.
Cameron, T. J., Buisseret, H., & Georghiou, L. (1995). What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10(4–6), 587–600.
Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 38(5), 360–387.CrossRef
Costantini, V., Crespi, F., & Palma, A. (2015). Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation in energy-efficient technologies. SEEDS Working Paper Series, 11/2015.
Czarnitzki, D., Hanel, P., & Rosa, J. M. (2011). Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credits on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms. Research Policy, 40(2), 217–229.CrossRef
De Marchi, W. (2012). Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 41, 614–624.CrossRef
Edler, J., & Georghiou, L. (2007). Public Procurement and Innovation: Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36, 949–963.CrossRef
EIO. (2010). Methodological report. Eco-innovation observatory. Funded by the European Commission, DG Environment, Brussels.
EIO. (2012). The eco-innovation gap: An economic opportunity for business. Eco-innovation observatory. Funded by the European Commission, DG Environment, Brussels.
Flanagan, K., Uyarraa, E., & Laranja, M. (2011). Reconceptualising the policy-mix for innovation. Research Policy, 40, 702–713.CrossRef
Frondel, M., Horbach, J., & Rennings, K. (2008). What triggers environmental management and innovation? Empirical evidence for Germany. Ecological Economics, 66(1), 153–160.CrossRef
Garcia, A., & Mohnen, P. (2010). Impact of government support on R&D and innovation. Unu-Merit Working Paper, 2010-034.
Gerlach, A. (2003). Sustainable entrepreneurship and innovation. Center for Sustainability Management, University of Lüneburg. In Proceedings from the 2003, Conference on Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Leeds, UK.
Ghisetti, C., Marzucchi, A., & Montresor, S. (2015). The open eco-innovation mode. An empirical investigation of eleven European countries. Research Policy, 44, 1080–1093.CrossRef
Grabowski, W., Pamukcu, T., Szczygielski, K., & Tandogan, S. (2013). Does government support for private innovation matter? Firm-level evidence from Turkey and Poland. CASE Network Studies & Analysis 458.
Halpern, L. (2010). R&D subsidies and firm performance in Hungary. Micro-Dyn Working Paper, 38/10.
Hemmelskamp, J. (1999). The influence of environmental policy on innovative behavior – An econometric study. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei Working Paper No. 18.99, Milan.
Horbach, J. (2008). Determinants of environmental innovation – New evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, 37(1), 163–173.CrossRef
Horbach, J., & Rennings, K. (2007). Panel-survey analysis of eco-innovation: Possibilities and propositions, deliverable 4 and 5 of MEI (measuring eco-innovation) project. Mannheim: MEI (Measuring eco-innovation) project.
Horbach, J., Oltra, V., & Belin, J. (2013). Determinants and specificities of eco-innovations compared to other innovations: An econometric analysis for the French and German industry based on the community innovation survey. Industry and Innovation, 20(6), 523–543. doi:10.​1080/​13662716.​2013.​833375.CrossRef
Innovation Union Scoreboard. (2015). ec.europa.eu/…/innovation/…/scoreboards/…/ius-2015.
Kemp, R. (2000, June 19). Technology and environmental policy: Innovation effects of past policies and suggestions for improvement. Paper for OECD workshop on Innovation and Environment, Paris.
Kemp, R., & Pontoglio, S. (2011). The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant? Ecological Economics, 72, 28–36.CrossRef
Luukkonen, T. (2000). Additionality in EU framework programmes. Research Policy, 29(6), 711–724.CrossRef
Luukkonen, T., & Niskanen, P. (1998). Learning through collaboration. Finnish participation in EU framework programmes. VTT, Group for Technology Studies, Espoo.
Nelson, R. R. (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. Journal of Political Economy, 49, 297–306.CrossRef
Norman, C., & Klofsten, M. (2010). Financing new ventures: Attitudes towards public innovation support. New Technology-Based Firms in the New Millennium, 8, 89–110.CrossRef
OECD and Eurostat. (2005). Oslo Manual. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data (3rd ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing. Joint publication by OECD and Eurostat.
OECD. (2009). Eco-innovation in industry: Enabling green growth. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2011). Towards green growth. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (2012). Tax incentives for research and development. OECD science technology and industry outlook 2012. Paris: OECD.CrossRef
Palmer, K., Oates, W. E., & Portney, P. R. (1995). Tightening environmental standards: The benefit-cost or the no-cost paradigm? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 119–132.CrossRef
Paraskevopoulou, E. (2012). Non-technological regulatory effects: Implications for innovation and innovation policy. Research Policy, 41, 1058–1071.CrossRef
Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–373.CrossRef
Porter, M. (1991, April). America’s green strategy. Scientific American, 264(4).
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995a). Towards a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspective, 9(4), 97–118.CrossRef
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995b). Green and competitive. Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, September–October, 120–134.
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), 274–290.CrossRef
Szymura-Tyc, M., & Bałoń, M. (2011). Ekoinnowacja jako przesłanka rekonfiguracji modelu biznesu. Zeszyty Naukowe. Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu, 169, 256–265.
UNEP. (2009, March). United Nations environment programme. Global green new deal. Policy Brief.
Veugelers, R. (2012). Which policy instruments to induce clean innovating? Research Policy, 41, 1770–1778.CrossRef
Weresa, M. A., & Lewandowska, M. S. (2014). Innovation system restructuring in Poland in the context of EU membership. In M. A. Weresa (Ed.), Poland competitiveness report 2014: A decade in the European Union (pp. 171–191). Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics.
Yarahmadi, M., & Higgins, P. G. (2012). Motivations towards environmental innovation. A conceptual framework for multiparty cooperation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 15(4), 400–420.CrossRef
Yoon, E., & Tello, S. (2009). Drivers of sustainable innovation. Seoul Journal of Business, 15(2), 85–115.
Metadaten
Titel
Policies to Promote Eco-innovation: Results for Selected CEE Countries and Germany
verfasst von
Małgorzata Stefania Lewandowska, PhD
Copyright-Jahr
2016
Buch
Competitiveness of CEE Economies and Businesses

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-39653-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-39654-5

Copyright-Jahr: 2016

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39654-5_5