Adoption of Pollution Prevention Techniques: The Role of Management Systems and Regulatory Pressures

This paper investigates the extent to which firm level technological change that reduces unregulated emissions is driven by regulatory pressures, and firms’ technological and organizational capabilities. Using a treatment effects model with panel data for a sample of S&P 500 firms over the period 1994–1996, we find that organizational change in the form of Total Quality Environmental Management leads firms to adopt pollution prevention practices, after controlling for the effects of various regulatory pressures and firm-specific characteristics. We find that the threat of anticipated regulations and the presence of ‘complementary assets’ is important for creating the incentives and an internal capacity to undertake incremental adoption of pollution prevention techniques.

[1]  Lawrence J. White,et al.  Innovation in pollution control , 1986 .

[2]  E. Chynoweth,et al.  Environmental standards provide competitive advantage , 1993 .

[3]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Environmental Regulation and Innovation: A Panel Data Study , 1996, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[4]  Smita B. Brunnermeier,et al.  Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries , 2003 .

[5]  Z. Griliches HYBRID CORN: AN EXPLORATION IN THE ECONOMIC OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE , 1957 .

[6]  M. Khanna,et al.  Corporate Environmental Management: Regulatory and Market-Based Incentives , 2002, Land Economics.

[7]  John W. Maxwell,et al.  Quality leadership when regulatory standards are forthcoming , 2003 .

[8]  John A. List,et al.  US county-level determinants of inbound FDI: evidence from a two-step modified count data model , 2001 .

[9]  M. Khanna,et al.  Striving to be green: the adoption of total quality environmental management , 2008 .

[10]  F. Modigliani,et al.  Alternative Investment Performance Fee Arrangements and Implications for SEC Regulatory Policy , 1975 .

[11]  Richard Florida,et al.  Lean and Green: The Move to Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing , 1996 .

[12]  A. Prakash,et al.  Covenants with weak swords: ISO 14001 and facilities' environmental performance , 2005 .

[13]  M. Frondel,et al.  End-of-Pipe or Cleaner Production? An Empirical Comparison of Environmental Innovation Decisions Across OECD Countries , 2007 .

[14]  K. Rennings,et al.  Determinants of environmental product and process innovation , 1999 .

[15]  Madhu Khanna,et al.  Incentives for Environmental Self-Regulation and Implications for Environmental Performance , 2004 .

[16]  Eric W. Welch,et al.  Voluntary behavior by electric utilities: Levels of adoption and contribution of the climate challenge program to the reduction of carbon dioxide , 2000 .

[17]  Panagiotis Karamanos Voluntary environmental agreements for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: Incentives and characteristics of electric utility participants in the climate challenge program , 1999 .

[18]  A. Spence Monopoly, Quality, and Regulation , 1975 .

[19]  Ashoka Mody,et al.  Innovation and the international diffusion of environmentally responsive technology , 1996 .

[20]  Timothy N. Cason,et al.  Why do firms volunteer to exceed environmental regulations? : Understanding participation in EPA's 33/50 program , 1996 .

[21]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset Stock Accumulation and the Sustainability of Competitive Advantage: Reply , 1989 .

[22]  Kathleen Segerson,et al.  Voluntary Environmental Agreements: Good or Bad News for Environmental Protection? , 1998 .

[23]  Daniel Diermeier,et al.  Strategic Activism and Nonmarket Strategy , 2005 .

[24]  Ekundayo Shittu,et al.  Firm Incentives to Promote Technological Change in Pollution Control : Comment , 2004 .

[25]  G. Dosi Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[26]  Toshi H. Arimura,et al.  Is a voluntary approach an effective environmental policy instrument , 2008 .

[27]  Abdoul G. Sam,et al.  1 Voluntary Pollution Reductions and the Enforcement of Environmental Law : An Empirical Study of the 33 / 50 Program , 2004 .

[28]  Diane J. Ploch,et al.  Naugatuck Glass: An update on environmental successes with the systems approach , 2000 .

[29]  Nick Johnstone,et al.  An Empirical Study of Environmental R & D: What Encourages Facilities to be Environmentally Innovative? , 2007 .

[30]  Jennifer Nash,et al.  Standard or Smokescreen? Implementation of a Voluntary Environmental Code , 2000 .

[31]  Cary Coglianese,et al.  Regulating from the Inside: Can Environmental Management Systems Achieve Policy Goals , 2010 .

[32]  Scott Milliman,et al.  Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control: Reply , 1992 .

[33]  D. Rondinelli,et al.  CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND PUBLIC POLICY: BRIDGING THE GAP by , 2003 .

[34]  Ronald Maier,et al.  Strategy and Environment , 2002 .

[35]  Madhu Khanna,et al.  EPA's Voluntary 33/50 Program: Impact on Toxic Releases and Economic Performance of Firms , 1999 .

[36]  Petra Christmann Effects of “Best Practices” of Environmental Management on Cost Advantage: The Role of Complementary Assets , 2000 .

[37]  Christopher S. Decker,et al.  Voluntary Environmental Investment and Responsive Regulation , 2006 .

[38]  M. Porter,et al.  Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship , 1995 .

[39]  Michael J. Lenox,et al.  Industry Self-Regulation Without Sanctions: The Chemical Industry's Responsible Care Program , 2000 .

[40]  Jennifer Nash,et al.  Polaroid's environmental accounting and reporting system: Benefits and limitations of a tqem measurement tool , 1992 .

[41]  Lawrence J. White,et al.  Product Variety and the Inefficiency of Monopoly , 1988 .

[42]  T. Wikle Geographical Patterns of Membership in U.S. Environmental Organizations , 1995 .

[43]  Jacques-François Thisse,et al.  On the taxation of polluting products in a differentiated industry , 1999 .

[44]  Madhu Khanna,et al.  Non-mandatory Approaches to Environmental Protection , 2002 .

[45]  Wesley M. Cohen,et al.  Empirical studies of innovation and market structure , 1989 .

[46]  S. DeCanio,et al.  The Importance of Organizational Structure for the Adoption of Innovations , 2000 .

[47]  R. Blundell,et al.  Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation , 1994 .

[48]  Thomas J. Dean,et al.  Pollution Regulation as a Barrier to New Firm Entry: Initial Evidence and Implications for Future Research , 1995 .

[49]  E. Craigmcgee,et al.  Applying the baldrige quality criteria to environmental performance: Lessons from leading organizations , 1993 .

[50]  Ilan Vertinsky,et al.  Why Japanese Firms Choose to Certify: A Study of Managerial Responses to Environmental Issues , 2001 .

[51]  C. Garcés‐Ayerbe,et al.  Are More Innovative Firms Less Vulnerable to New Environmental Regulation? , 2007 .

[52]  M. Lenox,et al.  WHO ADOPTS MANAGEMENT STANDARDS EARLY? AN EXAMINATION OF ISO 14001 CERTIFICATIONS. , 2001 .

[53]  J. Hamilton Exercising Property Rights to Pollute: Do Cancer Risks and Politics Affect Plant Emission Reductions? , 1999 .

[54]  Perry Sadorsky,et al.  The Determinants of an Environmentally Responsive Firm: An Empirical Approach , 1996 .

[55]  Marilyn F. Johnson,et al.  WHY FIRMS SEEK ISO 9000 CERTIFICATION: REGULATORY COMPLIANCE OR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE? , 1999 .

[56]  Dave Moore,et al.  Using a systems approach to improve process and environmental performance , 2000 .

[57]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[58]  Philippe Barla,et al.  ISO 14001 Certification and Environmental Performance in Quebec's Pulp and Paper Industry , 2007 .

[59]  Timothy N. Cason,et al.  Do Community Characteristics Influence Environmental Outcomes?: Evidence from the Toxics Release Inventory , 1998 .

[60]  Michel Fontaine,et al.  Integrating product quality and environmental performance through innovation—the l'oréal case , 1994 .

[61]  Mark A. Cohen,et al.  Environmental and Financial Performance: Are They Related? , 1995 .

[62]  D. Teece,et al.  The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: an Introduction , 1994 .

[63]  Erkki Koskela,et al.  Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling , 2004 .

[64]  Shubhashis Gangopadhyay,et al.  Toward a theoretical model of voluntary overcompliance , 1995 .

[65]  Ronald J. Shadbegian,et al.  Pollution Abatement Costs, Regulation, and Plant-Level Productivity , 1995 .

[66]  Andreas R. Ziegler,et al.  Determinants of Environmental Innovations in Germany: Do Organizational Measures Matter? , 2004 .

[67]  Grace H. Wever,et al.  Kodak's framework and assessment tool for implementing TQEM , 1993 .

[68]  Paul Leinster,et al.  Environmental management systems and company performance: assessing the case for extending risk‐based regulation , 2003 .

[69]  Nicole Darnall,et al.  Environmental Management Systems: Do They Improve Performance? , 2003 .

[70]  D. Teece,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[71]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  What Bandwagons Bring: Effects of Popular Management Techniques on Corporate Performance, Reputation, and CEO Pay , 2000 .

[72]  David Wheeler,et al.  What Improves Environmental Performance? Evidence from Mexican Industry , 1997 .

[73]  Karel Cool,et al.  Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage , 1989 .

[74]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Fortune favors the prepared firm , 1994 .

[75]  Heidi A. Pickman The effect of environmental regulation on environmental innovation , 1998 .

[76]  R. O. Smitherman,et al.  Production and management , 1975 .

[77]  Ronald J. Shadbegian,et al.  Environmental Regulation, Investment Timing, and Technology Choice , 1997 .

[78]  Thomas P. Lyon,et al.  Self-Regulation and Social Welfare: The Political Economy of Corporate Environmentalism , 1998 .

[79]  Christopher S. Decker Corporate Environmentalism and Environmental Statutory Permitting* , 2003, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[80]  Anna Alberini,et al.  The appeal of voluntary environmental programs: which firms participate and why? , 2000 .