Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Should We Study the Relationship between Environmental Regulation and Innovation?

  • Conference paper
Innovation-Oriented Environmental Regulation

Part of the book series: ZEW Economic Studies ((ZEW,volume 10))

Abstract

This paper offers a conceptual framework for understanding the relationship between environmental regulation and innovation. It seeks to widen the concepts of innovation which are used in environment-oriented studies, while at the same time challenging the idea that regulation is either a straightforward facilitator or inhibitor of innovation. With respect to innovation, we present a ‘systems’ framework, one which emphasises the collective and interactive character of innovation, as an appropriate entry point for analysing the complex institutional, social and networking aspects of the impacts of regulation. With respect to regulation, we seek to challenge the stimulus-response model of the impacts of regulation on innovation. We contest the view that regulation either stops or starts innovation in any simple way. Rather, we take the view that regulation shapes or modulates innovation across networks of firms, and across groups of related industries. A productive way to think about the shaping of innovation is that firms innovate as a method of removing constraints. These may be constraints on the size or geographical location of the market they face, or constraints in labour supply, or finance, and so on. A significant constraint is the regulatory environment, which does not necessarily hinder innovation, but rather says that if firms are to innovate then they must do so with respect to certain performance parameters.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aichholzer, G., and G. Schienstock (eds.) (1994), Technology Policy: Towards an Integration of Social and Ecological Concerns, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashford, N. A., G. R. Heaton Jr. and W. C. Priest (1979), Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation and Technological Innovation, in: J.M. Utterback and C. Hill (eds.), Technological Innovation for a Dynamic Economy, 161–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashford, N. A. (1993), Understanding Technological Responses of Industrial Firms to Environmental Problems: Implications for Government Policy, in: K. Fischer and J. Schot (eds.), Environmental Strategies for Industry: International Perspectives on Research Needs and Policy Implications, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashford, N. A., C. Ayers and R. F. Stone (1985), Using Regulation to Change the Market for Innovation, Harvard Environmental Law Review 9, 419–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbara, A. J. and V. D. McConnell (1990), The Impact of Environmental Regulations on Industry Productivity: Direct and Indirect Effects, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19 (1), 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becher, G. (1994), Regulation and Innovation — Some new Prospects of Science and Technology Policy in the Federal Republic of Germany, in: G. Becher and S. Kuhlmann (eds.), Evaluation of Technology Policy Programmes in Germany, Dordrecht, 331–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, G. (1991), Air Pollution Control Policy in the European Community. Implementation of the EC Directives in the Twelve Member States, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, R. (1988), Technical change and the theory of Regulation in: G. Dosi et al., Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brousseau (1998), Conceptual and Methodological Approach for Investigating the Impact of Single Market Regulation on Innovation, ATOM, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carraro, C. (1994), Technical Innovation and Environment Protection, European Economic Review 38 (3–4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, R.W (1981), Pollution Controls and Productivity Growth in Basic Industries, in: T.G. Cowing and R.E. Stevenson (eds.), Productivity Measurement in Regulated Industries, New York, 347–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, L. N. and D. R. Johnson (1975), Regulation and the Political Process, Yale Law Journal, 84 (7), 1395–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzau, A., and D. North (1993), Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions, Kyklos 47 (1), 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downing, P. B. and L. J. White (1986), Innovation in Pollution Control, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 13, 18–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eads, G. C. (1980), Regulation and Technical Change: Some Largely Explored Influences, American Economic Review 70 (2), 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist, (1996), Overregulating America. Tomorrow’s Economic Argument, July 27, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edquist, C. (ed.) (1997), Systems of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions and Organizations,London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, J. (1993), The Politics of Regulation. A Comparative Perspective. Oxford..

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallop, F. M., and M. J. Roberts (1983), Environmental Regulations and Productivity Growth: The Case of Fossil-Fueled Electric Power Generation, Journal of Political Economy 91, 654–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons et al. (1994), The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Comtemporary Societies, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, W. B., (1987), The Cost of Regulation: OSHA, EPA, and the Productivity Slowdown, American Economic Review 77 (5). 998–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, W. B. and R. J. Shadbegian (1993), Environmental Regulation and Manufacturing Productivity at the Plant Level, NBER working paper 4321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, W. B., and R. J. Shadbegian, (1994), Pollution Abatement Costs, Regulation and Plant-Level Productivity, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K., A. McMeekin (1995), Excellent at What? Environmental Business and Technology Strategies, Working paper 9505, CROMTECH, Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenewegen, P. and P. Vergragt (1991), Environmental Issues as Threats and Opportunities for Technological Innovation, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 3 (1), 43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, C. and M. Hill (1994), The Policy Process in the Modern Capitalist State,Hemel Hempstead.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. and G. Ahuja (1996), Does it Pay to be Green? An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Emission Reduction and Firm Performance, Business Strategy and the Environment 5, 30–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartje, V. J., R. L. Lurie (1985), Research and Development Incentives for Pollution Control Technologies, International Institute for Environment and Society ( IIUG ), Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartje, V. J. (1984), Environmental Product Regulation and Innovation: Limiting Phosphates in Detergents in Germany, International Institute for Environment and Society ( IIUG ), Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haveman, R. H. and G. B. Christiansen (1981), Environmental Regulations and Productivity Growth, in: Peskin, H., P. Portnoy and A. V. Kneese (eds.), Environmental Regulation and the U.S. Economy, Washington D.C., Resources for the Future, 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmelskamp, J. (1996), Environmental Policy Instruments and their Effects on Innovation, ZEW Discussion Paper 96–22, Mannheim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmelskamp, J. (1997), Environmental Policy Instruments and their Effects on Innovation, European Planning Studies 5 (2), 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaton Jr., G. R. (1990), Regulation and Technological Change, paper for the WRI/OECDSymposium Toward 2000: Environment, Technology and the New Century, Annapolis, Maryland, June 13–15, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogwood, B.W. and L.A. Gunn (1984), Policy Analysis for the Real World,Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howes, R., J. Skea and B. Whelan (1997), Clean and Competitive? Motivating Environmental Performance in Industry,London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hucke, J. (1982), Implementating Environmental Regulations in the Federal Republic of Germany, Policy Studies Journal 1, 130–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A. and P. D. Hooper (1992), Clean Technology, Successful Innovation and the `Greening of Industy’, Business Strategy and the Environment 1(2), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A., S. R. Peterson, P. R. Portney and R. Stavins (1995), Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?, Journal of Economic Literature 33 (1), 132–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B. and K. Palmer (1996), Environmental Regulation and Innovation: A Panel Data Study,Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. (1992), Institutional learning, in: B.A. Lundvall (ed.), National Systems of Innovation. Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson, D. W. and P. J. Wilcoxen (1990), Environmental Regulation and U.S. Economic Growth, Rand Journal of Economics 21, 314–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R. and L. Soete (1992), The Greening of Technological Progress: An Evolutionary Perspective, Futures 24 (5), 437–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R., X. Olsthoorn, F. Oosterhuis and H. Verbruggen (1992), Supply and Demand Factors of Cleaner Technologies: Some Empirical Evidence, Environmental and Resource Economics 2 (6), 615–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, René, X. Olsthoorn, F. Oosterhuis and H. Verbruggen (1994a), Policy Instruments To Stimulate Clean Technology, in: J.B. Opschoor and R.K. Turner (eds.), Economic Incentives and Environmental Policies, Dordrecht, 275–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R., I. Miles, K. Smith et al. (1994), Technology and the Transition to Environmental Stability. Continuity and Change in Complex Technology Systems,final report from project “Technological Paradigms and Energy Technologies” for SEER research programme of the CEC (DG XII).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R. (1994), Technology and the Transition to Environmental Sustainability. The Problem of Technological Regime Shifts, Futures 26 (10), 1023–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R. (1996), The Transition from Hydrocarbons. The Issues for Policy, in: S. Faucheux, D. Pearce and J.L.R. Proops (eds.), Models of Sustainable Development, Aldershot, 151–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R. (1997), Environmental Policy and Technical Change. A Comparison of the Technological Impact of Policy Instruments Cheltenham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R., A. Rip and J. Schot (1997), Constructing Transition Paths through the Management of Niches, paper for workshop “Path Creation and Dependence”, Copenhagen, Aug 19–22, 1997 (will be published in R. Garud and P. Karnoe (eds.), Path Creation and Dependence).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, R., J. Schot and R. Hoogma (1998), Regime Shifts to Sustainability through Processes of Niche Formation. The Approach of Strategic Niche Management, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 10 (2), 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoepfer, P. and H. Weidner (1982), Formulation and Implementation of Air Quality Control Programmes: Patterns of Interest Consideration, Policy and Politics 10 (1), 85–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazonick, W. (1991), Business Organisation for Competitive Advantage: Capitalist Transformations in the Twentieth Century, in: G. Dosi, R. Giannetti, and P.A. Toinelli (eds.), Technology and Enterprise in a Historical Perspective, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenox, M. and J. Ehrenfeld (1996), Organizing for Effective Environmental Design, Business Strategy and the Environment 6, 187–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lévêque, F. (ed.) (1996), Environmental Policy in Europe. Industry, Competitiveness and the Policy Process, Cheltenham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.A. (ed) (1992), National Systems of Innovation. Towards a Theory of Innovtion and Interactive Learning, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magat, W. A. (1979), The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Innovation, Law and Contemporary Problems 43 (1), 4–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1976), Choice Among Policy Instruments for Pollution Control, Policy Analysis, 589–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1989), Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process,New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malaman, R. (1996), Technological Innovation for Sustainable Development: Generation and Diffusion of Industrial Cleaner Technologies, Nota di Lavoro 66.96, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruo, K. (1992), The Three-Way “Catalysis”: How the Three-Way Catalyst Became the Ruling Technical Solution to the Automobile Emission Problem, in M. Hart (ed.), Automobile Engineering in a Dead End: Mainstream and laternative Developments in the 20th Century, publications in Human Technology nr 5, Gothenburg University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R. and J. Hucke (1978), Gesetzesvollzug im Umweltschutz, Wirksamkeit und Probleme, Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik, 217–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milbrath, L. W. and F. R. Inscho (ed.) (1975), The Politics of Environmental Policy, Beverly Hills, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, I. and K. Green (1996), A Clean Break? From Corporate Research and Development to Sustainable Technological Regimes, in: R. Welford and R. Starkey (eds.), The Earth-scan Reader in Business and the Environment, 120–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milliman, S. R. and R. Prince (1989), Firm Incentives to Promote Technological Change in Pollution Control, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 17, 247–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norsworthy, J. R., M. J. Harper and K. Kunze (1979), The Slowdown in Productivity Growth: Analysis of Some Contributing Factors, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2, 387–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C., (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance,Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1993), Institutions and Credible Commitment, JITE.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1985), Environmental Policy and Technical Change,Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1989), Economic Instruments for Environmental Protection,Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1997a), The OECD Report on Regulatory Reform, Vol H: Thematic Studies,Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1997b), Environmental Policies and Innovation: Analytical Framework, Draft report, Oct 1997, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, A. (ed.) (1984), The Regulation Game. How British and West German Companies Bargain with Government, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. and I. Brisson (1993), BATNEEC. The Economics of Technology-Based Environmental Standards, with a UK Illustration, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 9 (4), 24–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. and C. van der Linde (1995), Towards a new Conception of the Environment—Competitiveness Relationship, Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (4), 97–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repetto, R., (1995), Jobs, Competitiveness and Environmental Regulations: What are the issues?, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringeling and Hanf (1998), Internal document of INSTRUFECT project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A. and R. Kemp (1998), Technological Change, in S. Rayner and Liz Malone (eds.), Human Choice and Climate Change, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R. (1992), Industrial Innovation and Government Environmental Regulation: Some Lessons from the Past, Technovation 12 (7), 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roome, N. (1994), Business Strategy, RandD Management and Environmental Imperatives’, RandD Management, 24 (1), 65–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1993), Games in Hierarchies and Networks. Analytical and Empirical Approaches to the Study of Governance Institutions, Frankfurt a. M.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidheiny, S. (1992), Changing Course: A Global Business Perspective on Development and the Environment, Cambridge (MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schot, J. (1992), The Policy Relevance of the Quasi-Evolutionary Model: The Case of Stimulating Clean Technologies, in: R. Coombs, P. Saviotti and V. Walsh (eds.), Technological Change and Company Strategies, London, 185–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrivastava, Paul (1995), Environmental Technologies and Competitive Advantage, Strategic Management Journal 16, 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skea, J. (1995), Environmental Technology, in: H. Folmer, H. L. Gabel, and H. Opschoor (eds), Principles of Environmental and Resource Economics. A Guide for Students and Business Makers, Aldershot, 389–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (1997), Economic infrastructures and innovation systems in: C. Edquist (ed.), Innovation Systems: Institutions, Organisations and Dynamics, London, 86–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (1999), Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy, in: K. Bryant (ed.), A New Economic Paradigm? Innovation-Based Evolutionary Systems, Discussions of Science and Innovation 4, Department of Industry, Science and Technology, Canberrra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1997), Integrated Pollution Control, Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soete, L. and A. Arundel (eds.) (1993), An Integrated Approach to European Innovation and Technology Diffusion Policy. A Maastricht Memorandum,Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R. (1981), Regulation, Innovation and Administrative Law: A Conceptual Framework, California Law Review, 69 (5), 1256–1377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R. (1994), Environmental Regulation and International Competitiveness, Yale Law Journal 103, 2039–2122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., G. Pisano and A. Shuen, (1997), Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal 18 (7), 509–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNICE (1995), Releasing Europe’s Potential Through Targeted Regulatory Reform.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (1986), National Styles of Regulation. Environmental Policy in Great Britain and the United States,Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vollebergh, H. (ed.) (1989), Milieu en innovatie, Groningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (1995), Environmental Policy and Industrial Innovation: Strategies in Europe, the US and Japan, RIIA, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weale, A. (1992), The New Politics of Pollution, Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wichers, T. F. (1996), Green is the Colour of Money. Innovation Management in Environmental Technology, Graduation Thesis, Faculty of Economics and Business Studies, Maastricht University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, H. E., J. Medhurst and K. Drew (1991), Corporate Strategies For A Sustainable Future, in: Fischer, K. and J. Schot (eds.), Environmental Strategies for Industry: International Perspectives on Research Needs and Policy Implications, Washington, D.C., 117–146.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Maastricht Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, NL-6200 MD, Maastricht, Netherlands

    René Kemp

  2. STEP Group (Group for studies in technology, innovation and economic policy), Storgaten 1, N-0155, Oslo, Norway

    Keith Smith

  3. PROGNOS, Basel, Switzerland

    Gerhard Becher

Authors
  1. René Kemp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gerhard Becher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, European Commission, W.T.C. Isla de la Cartuja, 41092, Sevilla, Spain

    Jens Hemmelskamp  & Fabio Leone  & 

  2. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), L7, 1, 68161, Mannheim, Germany

    Klaus Rennings

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kemp, R., Smith, K., Becher, G. (2000). How Should We Study the Relationship between Environmental Regulation and Innovation?. In: Hemmelskamp, J., Rennings, K., Leone, F. (eds) Innovation-Oriented Environmental Regulation. ZEW Economic Studies, vol 10. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12069-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12069-9_4

  • Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-1313-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-12069-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation