Promoting Green Innovation or Prolonging the Existing Technology

A case study of the chlor-alkali industry in Western Europe and Japan is presented examining the effects of environmental regulation on technological change. In Western Europe, standards were set for mercury emissions from chlor-alkali plants, which were gradually tightened subsequently. Research and development (R&D) efforts were directed to end-of-pipe technologies as well as process improvements for reducing mercury emissions, rather than to clean technologies, which eliminate mercury from within the production process. With a significant reduction in mercury emissions with end-of-pipe technologies, new plants continued to be built that relied on the mercury process. As long as these relatively new plants could be utilized, technological transition to the clean ion-exchange membrane process remained slow. The success in reducing mercury emissions with end-of-pipe technologies, in effect, helped to prolong the lifetime of the existing mercury process. In Japan, the government introduced policies to phase out the existing mercury process. The strict approach encouraged innovative companies to make R&D efforts on clean technologies, instead of end-of-pipe technologies for pollution abatement. Applied in a hasty and inflexible way, however, the stringent regulation initially induced most of the chlor-alkali producers to choose the diaphragm process, which later turned out to be inappropriate. After the regulatory schedule was modified to allow more time for process conversion, the remaining mercury-based plants were converted directly to the most efficient ion-exchange membrane process. The technological transition, however, was costly, as most of the diaphragm-based plants introduced following the regulatory mandate were operated only for a short period of time, with the large investment wasted.

[1]  Robert Ayers,et al.  The Life‐Cycle of Chlorine, Part I: Chlorine Production and the Chlorine‐Mercury Connection , 1997 .

[2]  Robert N. Stavins,et al.  The Effects of Environmental Regulation on Technology Diffusion: The Case of Chlorine Manufacturing , 2003 .

[3]  George R. Heaton,et al.  Toward a New Generation of Environmental Technology: The Need For Legislative Reform , 1997 .

[4]  Mark Smith,et al.  Strategic Responses to Environmental Regulation in the U.K. Automotive Sector: The European Union End‐of‐Life Vehicle Directive and the Porter Hypothesis , 2006 .

[5]  Kathryn Harrison,et al.  Talking with the Donkey: Cooperative Approaches to Environmental Protection , 1998 .

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

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

[8]  Reid Lifset,et al.  Industrial Ecology and Public Policy , 2005 .

[9]  Lloyd Orr,et al.  Incentive for Innovation as the Basis for Effluent Charge Strategy , 1976 .

[10]  Nicholas A. Ashford,et al.  Using Regulation to Change the Market for Innovation , 1985 .

[11]  William J. Baumol,et al.  The theory of environmental policy: Contents , 1988 .

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

[13]  W. Baumol,et al.  The theory of environmental policy: On the theory of externalities , 1988 .

[14]  J. Leddy The chlor-alkali industry , 1980 .

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

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

[17]  W. Arthur,et al.  INCREASING RETURNS AND LOCK-IN BY HISTORICAL EVENTS , 1989 .

[18]  R. Ayres,et al.  The Life Cycle of Chlorine, Part II: Conversion Processes and Use in the European Chemical Industry , 1997 .

[19]  Christopher Freeman,et al.  The economics of technical change , 1994 .

[20]  P. David Clio and the Economics of QWERTY , 1985 .

[21]  Wesley A. Magat,et al.  Pollution control and technological advance: A dynamic model of the firm , 1978 .

[22]  Wallace E. Oates,et al.  Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm? , 1995 .

[23]  Bjørn L. Basberg,et al.  Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature☆ , 1987 .

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

[25]  M. Porter,et al.  Industrial Ecology and Competitiveness , 1998 .

[26]  Margaret R. Taylor,et al.  Effect of government actions on technological innovation for SO2 control. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.