Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who comply better? The moderating role of firm heterogeneity on the performance of environmental regulation in China

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The evaluation on the performance of environmental regulation is among the hottest topics in environmental economics and management. Although industrial enterprise is the major regulatory objects of pollution control, the firm-level pollution abatement effect of environmental regulation has been rarely examined by existing literature. This paper attempts to fill this research gap by investigating the moderating effects of firm heterogeneity on the pollution abatement effect of environmental regulation in China. We establish a theoretical framework which demonstrates that firm heterogeneity determines firms’ compliance capability and willingness through firms’ absorptive capacity, bargaining power, and environmental awareness and then influences firms’ environmental performance under regulatory pressure. Combining firm-level data of pollutant emission with province-level data of environmental regulation, we empirically examine the moderating role of firm heterogeneity on the performance of environmental regulation. We adopt a moderating effect model and estimate it with Logit regression method. It is found that environmental regulation performs better in enterprises with high capital intensity, high total factor productivity (TFP), as well as in state-owned enterprises, export enterprises, and listed companies. In particular, command-and-control regulation performs better in domestic firms than in foreign-owned firms, while the performance of market-based regulation is just the opposite. It is also found that the moderating effect of firm heterogeneity on the performance of environmental regulation varies with regions and industrial sectors, especially for the moderating role of capital intensity and TFP. These findings help to understand the enterprise environmental behavior and provide insights on targeted and differentiated environmental governance from a micro-point of view.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahuti, S. (2015). Industrial growth and environmental degradation. International Education and Research Journal, 1(5), 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. (1994). Strategic environmental policy and international trade. Journal of Public Economics, 54(3), 325–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bu, M., & Wagner, M. (2016). Racing to the bottom and racing to the top: The crucial role of firm characteristics in foreign direct investment choices. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(9), 1032–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bu, M., Zhai, S., Zhang, J., & Zheng, W. (2014). Foreign Direct Investment and Pollution Havens Hypothesis: Firm-Level Panel Data Evidence from China. Frontiers of Economics and Globalization, 14, 73–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, H., & Liu, Q. (2009). Competition and corporate tax avoidance: Evidence from Chinese industrial enterprises. The Economic Journal, 119(537), 764–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, X., Wang, P., & Zhu, B. (2018). Has foreign direct investment increased air pollution in China? A hierarchical linear model approach. Natural Hazards, 91(2), 659–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Q., Maung, M., Shi, Y., & Wilson, C. (2014). Foreign direct investment concessions and environmental levies in China. International Review of Financial Analysis, 36, 241–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Z., Li, L., & Liu, J. (2017). The emissions reduction effect and technical progress effect of environmental regulation policy tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 149, 191–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2011). Does it really pay to be green? Determinants and consequences of proactive environmental strategies. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 30(2), 122–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M. A. (2004). Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: Examining the linkages. Ecological Economics, 48(1), 71–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, J., Lapan, H., & Moschini, G. (2016). Productivity, export, and environmental performance: Air pollutants in the United States. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 98(2), 447–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Agostino, L. M. (2015). How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: Integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis. Economia Politica, 32(2), 245–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dam, L., & Scholtens, B. (2008). Environmental regulation and MNEs location: Does CSR matter? Ecological Economics, 67(1), 55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., & Mamingi, N. (2001). Pollution and capital markets in developing countries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 42(3), 310–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demirel, P., & Kesidou, E. (2011). Stimulating different types of eco-innovation in the UK: Government policies and firm motivations. Ecological Economics, 70(8), 1546–1557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earnhart, D. H., Khanna, M., & Lyon, T. P. (2014). Corporate environmental strategies in emerging economies. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 8(2), 164–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairchild, A. J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009). A general model for testing mediation and moderation effects. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 10(2), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-008-0109-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frondel, M., Horbach, J., & Rennings, K. (2007). End-of-pipe or cleaner production? An empirical comparison of environmental innovation decisions across OECD countries. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(8), 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greaney, T. M., Li, Y., & Tu, D. (2017). Pollution control and foreign firms’ exit behavior in China. Journal of Asian Economics, 48, 148–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gschwandtner, A., & Lambson, V. E. (2006). Sunk costs, profit variability, and turnover. Economic Inquiry, 44(2), 367–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hao, Y., Deng, Y., Lu, Z. N., & Chen, H. (2018). Is environmental regulation effective in China? Evidence from city-level panel data. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188, 966–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, K., & Antweiler, W. (2003). Incentives for pollution abatement: Regulation, regulatory threats, and non-governmental pressures. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(3), 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J. (2006). Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: The case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces. Ecological Economics, 60(1), 228–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J., & Wang, H. (2012). Economic structure, development policy and environmental quality: An empirical analysis of Environmental Kuznets Curves with Chinese municipal data. Ecological Economics, 76, 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head, K., & Ries, J. (2003). Heterogeneity and the FDI versus export decision of Japanese manufacturers. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 17(4), 448–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horbach, J. (2008). Determinants of environmental innovation—New evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, 37(1), 163–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, C. L., &  Kung, F. H. (2011). Environmental consciousness and intellectual capital management. Management Decision, 49(9–10), 1405–1425.

  • Jaffe, A. B., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2002). Environmental policy and technological change. Environmental and Resource Economics, 22(1), 41–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, L., Lin, C., & Lin, P. (2014). The determinants of pollution levels: Enterprise-level evidence from Chinese manufacturing. Journal of Comparative Economics, 42(1), 118–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, B., & Lööf, H. (2008). Innovation activities explained by firm attributes and location. Econ. Innov. New Techn., 17(6), 533–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesidou, E., & Demirel, P. (2012). On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK. Research Policy, 41(5), 862–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanoie, P., Laurent-Lucchetti, J., Johnstone, N., & Ambec, S. (2011). Environmental policy, innovation and performance: New insights on the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 20(3), 803–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. I., & Alm, J. (2004). The Clean Air Act amendments and firm investment in pollution abatement equipment. Land Economics, 80(3), 433–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, H., & Li, L. (2021). Environmental sustainability EOQ model for closed-loop supply chain under market uncertainty: A case study of printer remanufacturing. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 151, 106525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, Z., Xu, C. K., Cheng, H., & Dong, J. (2018). What drives environmental innovation? A content analysis of listed companies in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 1567–1573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, C. Y., & Wu, C. H. (2009). Environmental consciousness, reputation and voluntary environmental investment. Australian Economic Papers, 48(2), 124–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M., Shadbegian, R., & Zhang, B. (2017). Does environmental regulation affect labor demand in China? Evidence from the textile printing and dyeing industry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 86, 277–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, T., Zhang, Y., & Liang, D. (2019). Can ownership structure improve environmental performance in Chinese manufacturing enterprises? The moderating effect of financial performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 225, 58–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maung, M., Wilson, C., & Tang, X. (2016). Political connections and industrial pollution: Evidence based on state ownership and environmental levies in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(4), 649–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mol, A. P., & Carter, N. T. (2006). China’s environmental governance in transition. Environmental Politics, 15(02), 149–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacheco, L. M., Alves, M. F. R., & Liboni, L. B. (2018). Green absorptive capacity: A mediation-moderation model of knowledge for innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1502–1513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, R., Zheng, D., Shi, M., & Zhang, X. (2019). Pollute first, control later? Exploring the economic threshold of effective environmental regulation in China’s context. Journal of Environmental Management, 248, 109275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paquin, R. L., Busch, T., & Tilleman, S. G. (2015). Creating economic and environmental value through industrial symbiosis. Long Range Planning, 48(2), 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pei, Y., Zhu, Y., Liu, S., et al. (2021). Industrial agglomeration and environmental pollution: Based on the specialized and diversified agglomeration in the Yangtze River Delta. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23, 4061–4085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, L. D., Zhou, M., & Wei, X. (2018). Regulation, innovation, and firm selection: The porter hypothesis under monopolistic competition. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 92, 638–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren, S., Li, X., Yuan, B., Li, D., & Chen, X. (2018). The effects of three types of environmental regulation on eco-efficiency: A cross-region analysis in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 173, 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, P. M., & Schiersch, A. (2017). CO2 emission intensity and exporting: Evidence from firm-level data. European Economic Review, 98, 373–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, N., Liao, H., Deng, R., & Wang, Q. (2019). Different types of environmental regulations and the heterogeneous influence on the environmental total factor productivity: Empirical analysis of China’s industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, H., & Zhang, L. (2006). China’s environmental governance of rapid industrialization. Environmental Politics, 15(02), 271–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinani, E., & Hobdari, B. (2010). Export market participation with sunk costs and firm heterogeneity. Applied Economics, 42(25), 3195–3207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solarin, S. A., Al-Mulali, U., Musah, I., & Ozturk, I. (2017). Investigating the pollution haven hypothesis in Ghana: An empirical investigation. Energy, 124, 706–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulph, A. (1994). Environmental policy, plant location and government protection. Springer Netherlands.

  • Wang, H., & Jin, Y. (2002). Industrial ownership and environmental performance: evidence from China. The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., Mamingi, N., Laplante, B., & Dasgupta, S. (2003). Incomplete enforcement of pollution regulation: Bargaining power of Chinese factories. Environmental and Resource Economics, 24(3), 245–262.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., & Yuan, B. (2018). Air pollution control intensity and ecological total-factor energy efficiency: The moderating effect of ownership structure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 186, 373–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, T., Tian, M., & Liu, Z. (2019a). Unpacking the influence of major cities on corporate environmental performance in China: A perspective of spatial knowledge spillover. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 17(6), 14561–14576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Zhang, C., & Zhang, Z. (2019). Pollution haven or porter? The impact of environmental regulation on location choices of pollution-intensive firms in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 248, 109248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1995). Bureaucrats in business: The economics and politics of government ownership. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xing, L., Shi, L., & Hussain, A. (2010). Corporations response to the energy saving and pollution abatement policy. International Journal of Environmental Research, 4(4), 637–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, B., Yang, S., & Bi, J. (2013). Enterprises’ willingness to adopt/develop cleaner production technologies: An empirical study in Changshu, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 40, 62–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Liang, G., Feng, T., Yuan, C., & Jiang, W. (2020). Green innovation to respond to environmental regulation: How external knowledge adoption and green absorptive capacity matter? Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1), 39–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M., Liu, Y., Wu, J., & Wang, T. (2018a). Index system of urban resource and environment carrying capacity based on ecological civilization. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 68, 90–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., Shi, M., Li, Y., Pang, R., & Xiang, N. (2018b). Correlating pm 2.5, concentrations with air pollutant emissions: A longitudinal study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Journal of Cleaner Production, 179, 103–113.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, D., & Shi, M. (2017). Multiple environmental policies and pollution haven hypothesis: Evidence from China’s polluting industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 295–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, D., Shi, M., & Pang, R. (2021). Agglomeration economies and environmental regulatory competition: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 124506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant [No. 71503241] and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Haidian District, Zhongguancun East Road 80, Beijing, China

    Rui Pang & Dan Zheng

  2. School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Yuhangtang Road 866, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

    Minjun Shi

Authors
  1. Rui Pang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Minjun Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dan Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Zheng.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pang, R., Shi, M. & Zheng, D. Who comply better? The moderating role of firm heterogeneity on the performance of environmental regulation in China. Environ Dev Sustain 24, 6302–6326 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01703-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01703-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation