The role of environmental regulation in the future competitiveness of the pulp and paper industry: the case of the sulfur emissions directive in Northern Europe.

Abstract Introduction of the sulfur emissions reduction directive for maritime transport has become a heavily debated policy issue in Northern Europe from the perspective of the future competitiveness of transport-dependent industries. The scientific value of this study is in its contribution to the scarce literature on the future of pulp and paper industry competitiveness from the tightening environmental regulation perspective, highlighting the complementary role of law-abiding and voluntary regulations. Using a Delphi-foresight method, the study evaluates the effectiveness of environmental regulation by identifying its positive and negative aspects for the future success of the pulp and paper industry, and uses the reduction of sulfur emissions as an example. From a business perspective, the panelists saw tightening regulation as both a threat and an opportunity, and stressed the role of the policy implementation in achieving actual environmental improvement. The strict regulatory measures were generally perceived as environmentally advantageous and more effective in the long term, but a rather divided view was seen in the ability of the sulfur emissions directive to effectively govern environmental sustainability. In discussion, the role of more voluntary alternatives to implementing command-and-control type policy measures is emphasized in complementing government legislation, to gain market benefits from greening the entire pulp and paper supply chain. To conclude, the development of sustainable transportation strategies has the potential to contribute toward long-term competitiveness in the pulp and paper industry, especially if new strategic innovation-oriented cross-sector partnerships develop in the production and use of transportation biofuels.

[1]  Gregory Jackson,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility and Institutional Theory: New Perspectives on Private Governance , 2012 .

[2]  L. Johansson,et al.  Atmospheric emissions of European SECA shipping: long-term projections , 2013 .

[3]  C. Rammer,et al.  Determinants of Eco-innovations by Type of Environmental Impact: The Role of Regulatory Push/Pull, Technology Push and Market Pull , 2011 .

[4]  John L. Campbell Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? an institutional theory of corporate social responsibility , 2007 .

[5]  F. Testa,et al.  A literature review on the links between environmental regulation and competitiveness , 2011 .

[6]  Kerstin Cuhls,et al.  Personal attitudes in the assessment of the future of science and technology: A factor analysis approach , 2001 .

[7]  Kenneth W. Abbott,et al.  Hard and Soft Law in International Governance , 2000, International Organization.

[8]  Anne Toppinen,et al.  Corporate responsibility and sustainable competitive advantage in forest-based industry: Complementary or conflicting goals? , 2011 .

[9]  Costs and benefits of reducing SO2 emissions from shipping in the Greek seas , 2010 .

[10]  Kevin Cullinane,et al.  Emission control areas and their impact on maritime transport , 2014 .

[11]  Robert I. Wakefield,et al.  A reappraisal of Delphi 2.0 for public relations research , 2014 .

[12]  Holly Powell Kennedy,et al.  Enhancing Delphi research: methods and results. , 2004, Journal of advanced nursing.

[13]  Teemu Makkonen,et al.  Sulphur content in ships bunker fuel in 2015: A study on the impacts of the new IMO regulations and transportation costs , 2009 .

[14]  Martin Steinert,et al.  A dissensus based online Delphi approach: An explorative research tool , 2009 .

[15]  Graeme Auld,et al.  The New Corporate Social Responsibility , 2008 .

[16]  DETERMINING THE COSTS TO INDUSTRY OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION , 2001 .

[17]  J. Peuckert What shapes the impact of environmental regulation on competitiveness? Evidence from Executive Opinion Surveys , 2014 .

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

[19]  George Wright,et al.  The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis , 1999 .

[20]  A. Toppinen,et al.  Standardizing social responsibility via ISO 26000: Empirical insights from the forest industry , 2015 .

[21]  Thomas P. Lyon,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility and the Environment: A Theoretical Perspective , 2007, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

[22]  Sanjay Sharma,et al.  Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities , 1998 .

[23]  Mikael Hildén,et al.  Environmental policies and marine engines—effects on the development and adoption of innovations , 2004 .

[24]  Marjorie Doudnikoff,et al.  Effect of a speed reduction of containerships in response to higher energy costs in Sulphur Emission Control Areas , 2014 .

[25]  S. Hart A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1995 .

[26]  M. Wagner How to reconcile environmental and economic performance to improve corporate sustainability: corporate environmental strategies in the European paper industry. , 2005, Journal of environmental management.

[27]  J. Horbach Determinants of Environmental Innovation - New Evidence from German Panel Data Sources , 2006 .

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

[29]  E. Fridell,et al.  Environmental assessment of marine fuels: liquefied natural gas, liquefied biogas, methanol and bio-methanol , 2014 .

[30]  B. Husted,et al.  Corporate Social Strategy: Stakeholder Engagement and Competitive Advantage , 2010 .

[31]  T. Zobel,et al.  Revisiting the ‘how’ of corporate social responsibility in extractive industries and forestry , 2014 .

[32]  D. Gritsenko,et al.  Binding rules or voluntary actions? A conceptual framework for CSR in shipping , 2014 .

[33]  Marileena Koskela Expert views on environmental impacts and their measurementin the forest industry , 2011 .

[34]  L. L. Rodrigues,et al.  Corporate Social Responsibility and Resource-Based Perspectives , 2006 .

[35]  Michael L. Kent,et al.  A Delphi study of the future of new technology research in public relations , 2014 .

[36]  Mind the gap! Comparing ex ante and ex post assessments of the costs of complying with environmental regulation , 2002 .

[37]  Uma G. Gupta,et al.  Theory and applications of the Delphi technique: A bibliography (1975–1994) , 1996 .

[38]  Michael Howlett,et al.  Beyond Good and Evil in Policy Implementation: Instrument Mixes, Implementation Styles, and Second Generation Theories of Policy Instrument Choice , 2004 .

[39]  Isak Kruglianskas,et al.  Principles of environmental regulatory quality: a synthesis from literature review , 2015 .

[40]  J. Tschirhart,et al.  Alternatives to traditional regulation , 1989 .

[41]  David Vogel,et al.  Private Global Business Regulation , 2008 .

[42]  Keith Brouhle,et al.  Evaluating the role of EPA policy levers: An examination of a voluntary program and regulatory threat in the metal-finishing industry , 2009 .

[43]  James J. Corbett,et al.  The costs and benefits of reducing SO2 emissions from ships in the US West Coastal waters , 2007 .

[44]  Kalevi Kyläheiko,et al.  Opening up new strategic options in the pulp and paper industry: Case biorefineries , 2011 .

[45]  B. Thorsen,et al.  Shades of green: a social scientific view on bioeconomy in the forest sector , 2014 .

[46]  Kes McCormick,et al.  The Bioeconomy in Europe: An Overview , 2013 .

[47]  Maija Hujala,et al.  Explaining the Shifts of International Trade in Pulp and Paper Industry , 2013 .

[48]  Daria Gritsenko,et al.  Governing shipping externalities: Baltic ports in the process of SOx emission reduction , 2013 .

[49]  Jacob Kronbak,et al.  The costs and benefits of sulphur reduction measures: Sulphur scrubbers versus marine gas oil , 2014 .

[50]  Paula Kivimaa,et al.  The role of policy instruments in the innovation and diffusion of environmentally friendlier technologies: popular claims versus case study experiences , 2008 .

[51]  J. Landeta Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences , 2006 .