The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?
01 Jan 2013-Review of Environmental Economics and Policy (Oxford University Press)-Vol. 7, Iss: 1, pp 2-22
TL;DR: The authors provides an overview of the key theoretical and empirical insights into the Porter Hypothesis, draws policy implications from these insights, and sketches out major research themes going forward, as well as highlights the major research topics going forward.
Abstract: Twenty years ago, Harvard Business School economist and strategy professor Michael Porter stood conventional wisdom about the impact of environmental regulation on business on its head by declaring that well-designed regulation could actually enhance competitiveness. The traditional view of environmental regulation held by virtually all economists until that time was that requiring firms to reduce an externality like pollution necessarily restricted their options and thus by definition reduced their profits. After all, if profitable opportunities existed to reduce pollution, profit-maximizing firms would already be taking advantage of those opportunities. Over the past 20 years, much has been written about what has since become known simply as the Porter Hypothesis (PH). Yet even today, we find conflicting evidence and alternative theories that might explain the PH, and oftentimes a misunderstanding of what the PH does and does not say. This paper provides an overview of the key theoretical and empirical insights into the PH to date, draws policy implications from these insights, and sketches out major research themes going forward.
Citations
More filters
National Center for Atmospheric Research1, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research2, University of Washington3, Stockholm Environment Institute4, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis5, University of Denver6, Utrecht University7, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency8, University of Stuttgart9, Wageningen University and Research Centre10, Columbia University11, Hunter College12
TL;DR: The SSP narratives as discussed by the authors is a set of five qualitative descriptions of future changes in demographics, human development, economy and lifestyle, policies and institutions, technology, and environment and natural resources, which can serve as a basis for integrated scenarios of emissions and land use, as well as climate impact, adaptation and vulnerability analyses.
Abstract: Long-term scenarios play an important role in research on global environmental change. The climate change research community is developing new scenarios integrating future changes in climate and society to investigate climate impacts as well as options for mitigation and adaptation. One component of these new scenarios is a set of alternative futures of societal development known as the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs). The conceptual framework for the design and use of the SSPs calls for the development of global pathways describing the future evolution of key aspects of society that would together imply a range of challenges for mitigating and adapting to climate change. Here we present one component of these pathways: the SSP narratives, a set of five qualitative descriptions of future changes in demographics, human development, economy and lifestyle, policies and institutions, technology, and environment and natural resources. We describe the methods used to develop the narratives as well as how these pathways are hypothesized to produce particular combinations of challenges to mitigation and adaptation. Development of the narratives drew on expert opinion to (1) identify key determinants of these challenges that were essential to incorporate in the narratives and (2) combine these elements in the narratives in a manner consistent with scholarship on their inter-relationships. The narratives are intended as a description of plausible future conditions at the level of large world regions that can serve as a basis for integrated scenarios of emissions and land use, as well as climate impact, adaptation and vulnerability analyses.
1,606 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a review of the recent literature on the geography of sustainability transitions is presented, which takes stock with achieved theoretical and empirical insights and synthesises and reflects upon insights of relevance for sustainability transitions following from analyses of the importance of place specificity.
Abstract: This review covers the recent literature on the geography of sustainability transitions and takes stock with achieved theoretical and empirical insights. The review synthesises and reflects upon insights of relevance for sustainability transitions following from analyses of the importance of place specificity and the geography of inter-organisational relations. It is found that these contributions focus on the geography of niche development rather than regime dynamics, and that there is an emphasis on understanding the importance of place-specificity at the local level. While there is a wide consensus that place-specificity matters there is still little generalisable knowledge about how place-specificity matters for transitions. Most contributions add spatial sensitivity to frameworks from the transitions literature, but few studies suggest alternative frameworks to study sustainability transitions. To address this, the review suggests promising avenues for future research on the geography of sustainability transitions, drawing on recent theoretical advancements in economic geography.
616 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the impact of environmental regulation on innovation and productivity in 17 European countries between 1997 and 2009, focusing on the manufacturing sectors of 17 countries and finding evidence of a positive impact of Environmental regulation on the output of innovation activity, as proxied by patents.
558 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine if the strong version of the Porter Hypothesis is supported in China by investigating how different regulatory instruments and the relative stringency impact "green" productivity.
507 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigated the impact of changes in environmental policy stringency on industry and firm-level productivity growth in a panel of OECD countries, and found that a tightening of environmental policy is associated with a short-term increase in industry level productivity in the most technologically advanced countries.
444 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the trade-off between environmental regulation and competitiveness unnecessarily raises costs and slows down environmental progress, and that instead of simply adding to cost, properly crafted environmental standards can trigger innovation offsets, allowing companies to improve their resource productivity.
Abstract: Accepting a fixed trade-off between environmental regulation and competitiveness unnecessarily raises costs and slows down environmental progress. Studies finding high environmental compliance costs have traditionally focused on static cost impacts, ignoring any offsetting productivity benefits from innovation. They typically overestimated compliance costs, neglected innovation offsets, and disregarded the affected industry's initial competitiveness. Rather than simply adding to cost, properly crafted environmental standards can trigger innovation offsets, allowing companies to improve their resource productivity. Shifting the debate from pollution control to pollution prevention was a step forward. It is now necessary to make the next step and focus on resource productivity.
8,154 citations
Book•
01 Sep 1998TL;DR: The seven revolutions for sustainable capitalism: competition, competition, triple win revolution, values from me to we revolution, information and transparency, no hiding place revolution, lifecylces from conception to resurrection revolution, partnerships after the honeymoon revolution, time three scenarios revolution, corporate governance, stake in the future, sustainability transition, value shifts, value migrations the worlds of money and power, sustainability audit, how are you placed.
Abstract: Introduction - is capitalism sustainable? seven revolutions for sustainable capitalism revolution 1 - competition - going for the triple win revolution 2 - values - from me to we revolution 3 - information and transparency - no hiding place revolution 4 - lifecylces - from conception to resurrection revolution 5 - partnerships - after the honeymoon revolution 6 - time - three scenarios revolution 7 - corporate governance - stake in the future the sustainability transition - value shifts, value migrations the worlds of money and power the sustainability audit - how are you placed?
5,329 citations
01 Sep 1995
TL;DR: The Dutch flower industry has responded to its environmental problems by developing a closed-loop system to reduce the risk of infestation, reducing the need for fertilizers and pesticides, and improving product quality as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The need for regulation to protect the environment gets widespread but grudging acceptance: widespread because everyone wants a livable planet, grudging because of the lingering belief that environmental regulations erode competitiveness. The prevailing view is that there is an inherent and fixed trade-off: ecology versus the economy. On one side of the trade-off are the social benefits that arise from strict environmental standards. On the other are industry's private costs for prevention and cleanup -- costs that lead to higher prices and reduced competitiveness. With the argument framed this way, progress on environmental quality has become a kind of arm-wrestling match. One side pushes for tougher standards; the other tries to roll them back. The balance of power shifts one way or the other depending on the prevailing political winds. This static view of environmental regulation, in which everything except regulation is held constant, is incorrect. If technology, products, processes, and customer needs were all fixed, the conclusion that regulation must raise costs would be inevitable. But companies operate in the real world of dynamic competition, not in the static world of much economic theory. They are constantly finding innovative solutions to pressures of all sorts -- from competitors, customers, and regulators. Properly designed environmental standards can trigger innovations that lower the total cost of a product or improve its value. Such innovations allow companies to use a range of inputs more productively -- from raw materials to energy to labor -- thus offsetting the costs of improving environmental impact and ending the stalemate. Ultimately, this enhanced resource productivity makes companies more competitive, not less. Consider how the Dutch flower industry has responded to its environmental problems. Intense cultivation of flowers in small areas was contaminating the soil and groundwater with pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. Facing increasingly strict regulation on the release of chemicals, the Dutch understood that the only effective way to address the problem would be to develop a closed-loop system. In advanced Dutch greenhouses, flowers now grow in water and rock wool, not in soil. This lowers the risk of infestation, reducing the need for fertilizers and pesticides, which are delivered in water that circulates and is reused. The tightly monitored closed-loop system also reduces variation in growing conditions, thus improving product quality. Handling costs have gone down because the flowers are cultivated on specially designed platforms. In addressing the environmental problem, then, the Dutch have innovated in ways that have raised the productivity with which they use many of the resources involved in growing flowers. The net result is not only dramatically lower environmental impact but also lower costs, better product quality, and enhanced global competitiveness. (See the insert "Innovating to Be Competitive: The Dutch Flower Industry.") This example illustrates why the debate about the relationship between competitiveness and the environment has been framed incorrectly. Policy makers, business leaders, and environmentalists have focused on the static cost impacts of environmental regulation and have ignored the more important offsetting productivity benefits from innovation. As a result, they have acted too often in ways that unnecessarily drive up costs and slow down progress on environmental issues. This static mind-set has thus created a self-fulfilling prophecy leading to ever more costly environmental regulation. Regulators tend to set regulations in ways that deter innovation. Companies, in turn, oppose and delay regulations instead of innovating to address them. The whole process has spawned an industry of litigators and consultants that drains resources away from real solutions. POLLUTION = INEFFICIENCY Are cases like the Dutch flower industry the exception rather than the rule? …
4,056 citations
TL;DR: Theoretical and empirical literature on mechanisms that confer advantages and disadvantages on first-mover firms are surveyed and recommendations are given for future research.
Abstract: The use of a fairly standard vehicle width of a little under 2 meters originates from the design of prehistoric carts and sleds as evidenced by rutting in ancient roads which aided in steering Despite dramatic advances in vehicular and infrastructural technologies, the standard has changed little over the millennia The gauges of railroad track, for instance, are now standardized at 4 feet 8 and half inches (1435 mm) across Europe and North America, the same as the first steam railway, and a mere half-inch wider than the typical pre-steam tracks in the mining districts near Newcastle, consistent in size with the wheel gauge used in Roman Britain This standard gauge lasted since it was first used on the Stockton and Darlington railway in 1825, and were adopted by most subsequent lines (Puffert, 2002), despite some railways trying alternatives (eg the Great Western Railway was originally built at 5 feet 6 inches, or 1676 mm) Alternative gauges would have accommodated wider, taller, and faster trains more easily, but the standard gauge that was adopted first acquired advantages as other railways sought compatibility with the standard to obtain access to the uses of earlier lines, and helped lock-in that standard
3,144 citations