Environmental regulations, innovation and firm performance: A revisit of the Porter hypothesis

被引:368
|
作者
Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan [1 ]
He, Qile [2 ]
Black, Andrew [3 ]
Ghobadian, Abby [4 ]
Gallear, David [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bedfordshire, Business Sch, Luton, Beds, England
[2] Coventry Univ, Coventry Business Sch, Coventry CV1 5FB, W Midlands, England
[3] Univ Nottingham, Business Sch, Nottingham, England
[4] Univ Reading, Henley Business Sch, Reading, Berks, England
[5] Brunel Univ, Brunel Business Sch, Uxbridge, Middx, England
关键词
Environmental regulations; Flexibility; Innovation; Public benefits of sustainability; Private benefits of sustainability; Porter hypothesis; RESOURCE-BASED VIEW; PRODUCT INNOVATION; FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE; DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; IMPACT; INDUSTRY; MANAGEMENT; COMPETITIVENESS; TECHNOLOGY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.116
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This paper examines the relationships between environmental regulations, firms' innovation and private sustainability benefits using nine case studies of UK and Chinese firms. It aims to unravel the mechanisms by which a firm's environmental behaviour in improving its private benefits of sustainability is influenced by its relationship with the government, which primarily enacts regulations to maximise public sustainability benefits in the interests of society as a whole. The paper takes its cue from the Porter hypothesis to make some broad preliminary assumptions to inform the research design. A conceptual framework was developed through inductive case studies using template analysis. The results show that depending on firms' resources and capabilities, those that adopt a more dynamic approach to respond to environmental regulations innovatively and take a proactive approach to manage their environmental performance are generally better able to reap the private benefits of sustainability. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 92
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Can environmental regulation promote industrial innovation and productivity?Based on the strong and weak Porter hypothesis
    Baolong Yuan
    Kun Zhang
    Chinese Journal of Population,Resources and Environment, 2017, (04) : 322 - 336
  • [32] State Ownership and Firm Performance: A Revisit
    Ye, Kangtao
    Liu, Hang
    FRONTIERS OF BUSINESS RESEARCH IN CHINA, 2012, 6 (02) : 201 - 217
  • [33] The Influences of Multi-Level Environmental Regulations on Firm Performance in China
    Kong, Fanjing
    ECONOMICS-THE OPEN ACCESS OPEN-ASSESSMENT E-JOURNAL, 2024, 18 (01):
  • [34] Heterogeneous environmental regulations and firm financial performance: the moderating effects of marketization
    Qi, Te
    Chen, Lianghua
    ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2024,
  • [35] Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the porter hypothesis
    Paul Lanoie
    Michel Patry
    Richard Lajeunesse
    Journal of Productivity Analysis, 2008, 30 : 121 - 128
  • [36] Impact of environmental regulations on innovation and performance in the UK industrial sector
    Ramanathan, Ramakrishnan
    Black, Andrew
    Nath, Prithwiraj
    Muyldermans, Luc
    MANAGEMENT DECISION, 2010, 48 (10) : 1493 - 1513
  • [37] Financial innovation regulations and firm performance: Evidence from Chinese listed firms
    Yang, Minhua
    AUSTRALIAN ECONOMIC PAPERS, 2022, 61 (01) : 24 - 41
  • [38] Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the Porter hypothesis
    Lanoie, Paul
    Patry, Michel
    Lajeunesse, Richard
    JOURNAL OF PRODUCTIVITY ANALYSIS, 2008, 30 (02) : 121 - 128
  • [39] Environmental innovation approaches and business performance: effects of environmental regulations and resource commitment
    Wu, Guo-Ciang
    INNOVATION-ORGANIZATION & MANAGEMENT, 2017, 19 (04): : 407 - 427
  • [40] The influence of environmental regulations on business innovation, intellectual capital, environmental and economic performance
    Trevlopoulos N.S.
    Tsalis T.A.
    Evangelinos K.I.
    Tsagarakis K.P.
    Vatalis K.I.
    Nikolaou I.E.
    Environment Systems and Decisions, 2021, 41 (1) : 163 - 178