Skip to main content

Does emission trading scheme have spillover effect on industrial structure upgrading? Evidence from the EU based on a PSM-DID approach

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 27, pages 12345–12357 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

The coordinated development of environmental pollution and the economy has become a global problem. Emission trading scheme (ETS) has become a significant environmental policy instrument, prior studies primarily concentrated on micro-level factors with specific industries; there lacks discussion on the effects of ETS on macro-level industrial structure such as industrial structure upgrading. In this paper, we first use the propensity score matching (PSM) to screen out the control group in which countries are matched with the members of the EU, and then utilize the difference-in-differences (DID) method, to examine the effects of ETS implementation on national industrial structure upgrading in the members of the EU. Empirical results show that the EU ETS may does not have a significant impact on industrial structure change, while the implementation of EU ETS has significantly promoted the upgrading of the country’s industrial structure, and the policy effect of EU ETS on industrial structure upgrading gradually increases as time goes by and there is a dynamic effect. The conclusions of this paper can be used as reference for the development of emission reduction policies in large countries with unbalanced internal development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Abrell J, Anta NF, Georg Z (2011) Assessing the impact of the EU ETS using firm level data, Bruegel Working Paper, 2011/08. Belgium, Bruegel

    Google Scholar 

  • Adom PK, Bekoe W, Amuakwa-Mensah F, Mensah JT, Botchway E (2012) Carbon dioxide emissions, economic growth, industrial structure, and technical efficiency: empirical evidence from Ghana, Senegal, and Morocco on the causal dynamics. Energy 47(1):314–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Anger N, Oberndorfer U (2008) Firm performance and employment in the EU emissions trading scheme: an empirical assessment for Germany. Energy Policy 36(1):12–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Apergis N (2016) Environmental Kuznets curves: new evidence on both panel and country-level CO2 emissions. Energy Econ 54:263–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer C, Dijkstra B, Rosendahl KE (2014) Sectoral and regional expansion of emissions trading. Resour Energy Econ 37:201–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Caliendo M, Kopeinig S (2008) Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. J Econ Surv 22(1):31–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerin P (2006) Bringing economic opportunity into line with environmental influence: a discussion on the Coase theorem and the Porter and van der Linde hypothesis. Ecol Econ 56(2):209–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng ZH, Li LS, Liu J (2017) The emissions reduction effect and technical progress effect of environmental regulation policy tools. J Clean Prod 149(15):191–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng ZH, Li LS, Liu J (2018) Industrial structure, technical progress and carbon intensity in China’s provinces. Renew Sust Energ Rev 81(2):2935–2946

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui LB, Ying F, Lei Z, Bi QH (2014) How will the emissions trading scheme save cost for achieving China’s 2020 carbon intensity reduction target. Appl Energy 136(12):1043–1052

    Google Scholar 

  • Demailly D, Quirion P (2008) European emission trading scheme and competitiveness: a case study on the iron and steel industry. Energy Econ 30(4):2009–2027

  • Domazlicky BR, Weber WL (2004) Does environmental protection lead to slower productivity growth in the chemical industry? Environ Resour Econ 283:301–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker J (2015) An evaluation of competitive industrial structure and regional manufacturing employment change. Reg Stud 49(9):1481–1496

    Google Scholar 

  • European commission (2015) EU industrial structure report. Available from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/74b8adeb-f245-46f0-bd12-4ae6c0650385. Accessed 10 Nov 2019

  • Fan D, Wang GW, Liang PF (2017) Analysis of the performance of carbon emissions trading right in China--the evaluation based on the difference-in-difference model. China Environ Sci 37(6):2383–2392

    Google Scholar 

  • Gong Y, Wang Z, Gu GX (2015) Technology innovation and industry structure optimization: a study of agent-based simulation. Sci Res Manag 36(8):44–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottinger HW (1998) Greenhouse gas economics and computable general equilibrium. J Policy Model 20(5):537–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison A, Hyman B, Martin L, Nataraj S (2015) When do firms go green?Comparing price incentives with command and control regulations in Indian NBER. Working Paper. Cambridge, UK No 21763

  • Hoffmann VH (2007) EU ETS and investment decisions: the case of the German electricity industry. Eur Manag J 25(6):464–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Q.H., 2018. China’s industrialization process (research series on the Chinese dream and China’s development path). Springer, Berlin (2018)

  • Hübler M, Sebastian V, Andreas L (2014) Designing an emissions trading scheme for China: an up-to-date climate policy assessment. Energy Policy 75(6):57–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibikunle G, Gregoriou A (2018) Carbon markets: microstructure, pricing and policy. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaraite, J, Maria CD (2012) Efficiency, productivity and environmental policy: a case study of power generation in the EU. Energy Econ 34:1557–1568

  • Kara M, Syri S, Lehtilä A, Helynen S, Kekkonen V, Ruska M, Forsström J (2008) The impacts of EU CO2 emissions trading on electricity markets and electricity consumers in Finland. Energy Econ 30(2):193–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Laing T, Sato M, Grubb M, Comberti C (2014) The effects and side-effects of the EU emissions trading scheme. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 5(4):509–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Li W, Jia ZJ (2016) The impact of emission trading scheme and the ratio of free quota: a dynamic recursive CGE model in China. Appl Energy 174:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Li K, Lin BQ (2015) Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: does the level of development matter? Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:1107–1122

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li L, Lei YL, Wu SM, He CY, Chen JB, Yan D (2018) Impacts of city size change and industrial structure change on CO2 emissions in Chinese cities. J Clean Prod 195:831–838

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu W, Zhang H, Liu ZH (2008) Investigation on the industrialization structure and industrialization process and regional differences in China. Econ Perspect 11:4–8

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lund P (2007) Impacts of EU carbon emission trade directive on energy-intensive industries: indicative micro-economic analyses. Ecol Econ 63(4):799–806

    Google Scholar 

  • Meleo L (2014) On the determinants of industrial competitiveness: The European Union emission trading scheme and the Italian paper industry. Energy Policy 74:535–546

  • Montgomery WD (1972) Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs. J Econ Theory 5(3):395–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Muûls M, Colmer J, Martin R, Wagner UJ (2016) Evaluating the EU emissions trading system: take it or leave it? An assessment of the data after ten years. Briefing paper, 1-12

  • Porter M (1996) America’s green strategy. Business and the environment: A reader, 33

  • Porter ME, Van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9(4):97–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Rassier DG, Earnhart D (2015) Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability. Ecolo Econ 112:129–140

  • Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1985) Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat 39(1):33–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Smale R, Hartley M, Hepburn C, Ward J, Grubb M (2006) The impact of CO2 emissions trading on firm profits and market prices. Clim Pol 6(1):31–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Song J, Wang J (2018) Research on the transmission mechanism of environmental pollution to industrial structure change: from the perspective of total factor productivity in international segmentation industry. World Econ Stud 6:109–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Stavins RN (2003) Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments. Handb Environ Econ 1:355–435 Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuart EA, Huskamp HA, Duckworth K, Simmons J, Song Z, Chernew M, Barry CL (2014) Using propensity scores in difference-in-differences models to estimate the effects of a policy change. Health Serv Outcome Res Methodol 14(4):166–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun R, Dan K, Chang D (2014) The influences of carbon trading on energy, economy and environment and a legitimate range calculation of carbon pricing. China Popul Resour Environ 24(7):82–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan J, Zhang JH (2018) Does China’s ETS force the upgrade of industrial structure: evidence from synthetic control method. Res Econ Manag 39(12):104–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian X, Chang M, Shi F, Tanikawa H (2014) How does industrial structure change impact carbon dioxide emissions? A comparative analysis focusing on nine provincial regions in China. Environ Sci Pol 37:243–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen G, Mohnen P (2017) Revisiting the Porter hypothesis: an empirical analysis of green innovation for the Netherlands. Econ Innov New Technol 26(1–2):63–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang LX (2012) Implementation of the EU ETS and an economic analysis. World Chinese Entrepreneur Economic Yearbook (Theoretical Edition), 5–6

  • Wang ZH, Zhang B, Zeng HL (2016) The effect of environmental regulation on external trade: empirical evidences from Chinese economy. J Clean Prod 114:55–61

  • Wang C, Zhang XY, Vilela ALM et al (2019) Industrial structure upgrading and the impact of the capital market from 1998 to 2015: a spatial econometric analysis in Chinese regions. Phys A 513(1):189–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Wng WN (2009) Some analyses on the EU emissions trading scheme and its effects. World Econ Stud 7:68–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang YY, Zhao T, Wang YN, Shi ZH (2015) Research on impacts of population related factors on carbon emissions in Beijing from 1984 to 2012. Environ Impact Assess Rev 55:45–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang D, Chen LY (2019) Environmental regulation, upgrading of industrial structure and economic fluctuation: an empirical study of dynamic panel threshold. J Environ Econ 2:92–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang YJ, Wei YM (2010) An overview of current research on EU ETS: evidence from its operating mechanism and economic effect. Appl Energy 87(6):1804–1814

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang YJ, Liu Z, Zhang H, Tan TD (2014) The impact of economic growth, industrial structure and urbanization on carbon emission intensity in China. Nat Hazards 73(2):579–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang C, Shi D, Li PF (2017) The potential effects of China’s implementation of inter-provincial carbon emissions rights trading. Finance Trade Econ 2:93–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou XH, Fan QQ (2016) Mechanisms for the attainment of carbon intensity reduction targets and the optimal design of industry emissions abatement processes. J World Econ 7:168–192

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71701193, 71804174, and 71601174).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, No.96 Jinzhai Road, Hefei, 230026, Anhui Province, People’s Republic of China

    Jianing Zang, Liang Wan, Zejun Li, Chengyuan Wang & Shanyong Wang

Authors
  1. Jianing Zang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liang Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zejun Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chengyuan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shanyong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liang Wan.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Responsible editor: Eyup Dogan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zang, J., Wan, L., Li, Z. et al. Does emission trading scheme have spillover effect on industrial structure upgrading? Evidence from the EU based on a PSM-DID approach. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 12345–12357 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07818-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-07818-0

Keywords

  • Emission trading scheme
  • Industrial structure upgrading
  • PSM
  • DID method