When and why does it pay to be green ?

The conventional wisdom about environmental protection is that it comes at an additional cost on firms imposed by the government, which may erode their global competitiveness. However, during the last decade, this paradigm has been challenged by a number of analysts. In particular, Porter (Porter, 1991; Porter and van der Linde, 1995) argues that pollution is often associated with a waste of resources (material, energy, etc.), and that more stringent environmental policies can stimulate innovations that may compensate for the costs of complying with these policies. This is known as the Porter hypothesis. In fact, there are many ways through which improving the environmental performance of a company can lead to a better economic or financial performance, and not necessarily to an increase in cost. To be systematic, it is important to look at both sides of the balance sheet.First, a better environmental performance can lead to an increase in revenues through the following channels: i) a better access to certain markets; ii) the possibility to differentiate products and iii) the possibility to sell pollution-control technology. Second, a better environmental performance can lead to cost reductions in the following categories: iv) regulatory cost; v) cost of material, energy and services (this refers mainly to the Porter hypothesis); vi) cost of capital, and vii) cost of labour. Although these different possibilities have been identified from a conceptual or theoretical point of view for some time (Reinhardt, 2000; Lankoski, 2000, 2006), to our knowledge, there was no systematic effort to provide empirical evidences supporting the existence of these opportunities and assessing their “magnitude”. This is the objective of this paper. For each of the seven possibilities identified above [i) through vii)], we present the mechanisms involved, a systematic view of the empirical evidence available, and a discussion of the gaps in the empirical literature. The objective of the paper is not to show that a reduction of pollution is always accompanied by a better financial performance, it is rather to argue that the expenses incurred to reduce pollution can sometime be partly or completely compensated by gains made elsewhere. Through a systematic examination of all the possibilities, we also want to identify the circumstances most likely to lead to a “win-win” situation, i.e., better environmental and financial performance.ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY;INNOVATION;PORTER HYPOTHESIS;ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION;POLLUTION;CAPITAL MARKET;GREEN PRODUCTS

Environmental policy, innovation and performance : new insights on the Porter hypothesis

Jaffe and Palmer (1997) present three distinct variants of the so-called Porter Hypothesis. The “weak” version of the hypothesis posits that environmental regulation will stimulate certain kinds of environmental innovations. The “narrow” version of the hypothesis asserts that flexible environmental policy regimes give firms greater incentive to innovate than prescriptive regulations, such as technology-based standards.Finally, the “strong” version posits that properly designed regulation may induce cost-saving innovation that more than compensates for the cost of compliance. In this paper, we test the significance of these different variants of the Porter Hypothesis using data on the four main elements of the hypothesised causality chain (environmental policy, research and development, environmental performance and commercial performance). The analysis is based upon a unique database which includes observations from approximately 4200 facilities in seven OECD countries. In general, we find strong support for the “weak” version, qualified support for the “narrow” version, and qualified support for the “strong” version as well.PORTHER HYPOTHESIS;ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY;INNOVATION;ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE;BUSINESS PERFORMANCE

Des billets verts pour des entreprises agricoles vertes ?

Il est de coutume d'associer à la protection de l'environnement l'idée que l'intervention des pouvoirs publics représente uniquement des coûts supplémentaires pour les agriculteurs. Cependant, depuis quelques années, ce paradigme est remis en cause par de nombreuses études. Par exemple, Porter et van der Linde (Porter, 1991; Porter and van der Linde, 1995) considèrent que la pollution est souvent associée à une sous utilisation des ressources (matière première, énergie, etc.) et que l'existence de politiques environnementales plus strictes peut stimuler l'innovation et, par là même, aboutir à une compensation des coûts supportés par les entreprises régulées. En réalité, il existe de multiples canaux par lesquels une amélioration de la performance environnementale des exploitations agricoles peut aboutir à de meilleures performances économiques, ou en tout cas pas nécessairement à un accroissement des coûts d'exploitation. Pour être systématique, il faut examiner les impacts de la performance environnementale non seulement en termes de revenus additionnels, mais également en termes de réduction des coûts. En suivant le cadre d'analyse proposé par Reinhardt (2000), Lankoski (2000, 2006) et Lanoie et Ambec (2007), nous pouvons tout d'abord constater qu'une amélioration des performances environnementales peut induire un accroissement des recettes via trois canaux : i) l'accès à de nouveaux marchés,; ii) la possibilité de différencier les produits et iii) la possibilité de vendre des technologies environnementales. Par ailleurs, une meilleure performance environnementale peut également se traduire par une réduction des coûts dans les catégories suivantes : iv) coûts réglementaires; v) coûts des matières premières, des intrants et de l?énergie; vi) coût du capital et vii) coût du travail. L'objectif de cet article est d'appliquer ce cadre d'analyse au secteur agricole. Plus précisément, à l'aide d'illustration et d'études de cas, nous analysons pour chacun des sept points présentés ci-dessus les relations qui peuvent exister entre la performance environnementale des exploitations agricoles et leur performance économique. Si certains auteurs ont déjà étudié la rentabilité de différentes mesures ou techniques agro-environnementales, il n'existe pas à notre connaissance d'études systématiques. De plus, les exemples concrets d'expériences menées en France et au Québec montrent que la question de l'impact des pratiques environnementales sur la rentabilité des entreprises reste d'actualité, et que les approches proposées peuvent être une source d?inspiration pour les agriculteurs en réflexion quant à leur décision d?investir ou non en matière de protection de l'environnement.ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY;INNOVATION;ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE;BUSINESS PERFORMANCE;POLITIQUE DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT;POLLUTION;

The effect of cigarette price increase on the cigarette consumption in Taiwan: evidence from the National Health Interview Surveys on cigarette consumption

BACKGROUND: This study uses cigarette price elasticity to evaluate the effect of a new excise tax increase on cigarette consumption and to investigate responses from various types of smokers. METHODS: Our sample consisted of current smokers between 17 and 69 years old interviewed during an annual face-to-face survey conducted by Taiwan National Health Research Institutes between 2000 to 2003. We used Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) procedure to estimate double logarithmic function of cigarette demand and cigarette price elasticity. RESULTS: In 2002, after Taiwan had enacted the new tax scheme, cigarette price elasticity in Taiwan was found to be -0.5274. The new tax scheme brought about an average annual 13.27 packs/person (10.5%) reduction in cigarette consumption. Using the cigarette price elasticity estimate from -0.309 in 2003, we calculated that if the Health and Welfare Tax were increased by another NT$ 3 per pack and cigarette producers shifted this increase to the consumers, cigarette consumption would be reduced by 2.47 packs/person (2.2%). The value of the estimated cigarette price elasticity is smaller than one, meaning that the tax will not only reduce cigarette consumption but it will also generate additional tax revenues. Male smokers who had no income or who smoked light cigarettes were found to be more responsive to changes in cigarette price. CONCLUSIONS: An additional tax added to the cost of cigarettes would bring about a reduction in cigarette consumption and increased tax revenues. It would also help reduce incidents smoking-related illnesses. The additional tax revenues generated by the tax increase could be used to offset the current financial deficiency of Taiwan's National Health Insurance program and provide better public services

Economic gains and health benefits from a new cigarette tax scheme in Taiwan: a simulation using the CGE model

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the impact of an increase in cigarette tax in Taiwan in terms of the effects it has on the overall economy and the health benefits that it brings. METHODS: The multisector computable general equilibrium (CGE) model was used to simulate the impact of reduced cigarette consumption resulting from a new tax scheme on the entire economy gains and on health benefits. RESULTS: The results predict that because of the new tax scheme, there should be a marked reduction in cigarette consumption but a notable increase in health benefits that include saving between 28,125 and 56,250 lives. This could save NT$1.222~2.445 billion (where US$1 = NT$34.6) annually in life-threatening, cigarette-related health insurance expenses which exceeds the projected decrease of NT$1.275 billion in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) because of reduced consumption and therefore tax revenue. CONCLUSION: Overall, the increased cigarette excise tax will be beneficial in terms of both the health of the general public and the economy as a whole

The synergistic effect of cigarette taxes on the consumption of cigarettes, alcohol and betel nuts

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Consumption of cigarettes and alcoholic beverages creates serious health consequences for individuals and overwhelming financial burdens for governments around the world. In Asia, a third stimulant – betel nuts – increases this burden exponentially. For example, individuals who simultaneously smoke, chew betel nuts and drink alcohol are approximately 123 times more likely to develop oral, pharyngeal and laryngeal cancer than are those who do not.</p> <p>To discourage consumption of cigarettes, the government of Taiwan has imposed three taxes over the last two decades. It now wishes to lower consumption of betel nuts. To assist in this effort, our study poses two questions: 1) Will the imposition of an NT$10 Health Tax on cigarettes effectively reduce cigarette consumption? and 2) Will this cigarette tax also reduce consumption of alcoholic beverages and betel nuts? To answer these questions, we analyze the effect of the NT$10 tax on overall cigarette consumption as well as the cross price elasticities of cigarettes, betel nuts, and alcoholic beverages.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To establish the Central Bureau of Statistics demand function, we used cigarette, betel nut, and alcoholic beverage price and sales volume data for the years 1972–2002. To estimate the overall demand price elasticity of cigarettes, betel nuts, and alcoholic beverages, we used a seemingly unrelated regression analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We find that the NT$10 health tax on cigarettes will reduce cigarette consumption by a significant 27.22$10 health tax on cigarettes will reduce betel nut consumption by 20.07% and alcohol consumption by 7.5%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The assessment of a health tax on cigarettes as a smoking control policy tool yields a win-win outcome for both government and consumers because it not only reduces cigarette consumption, but it also reduces betel nut and alcoholic beverage consumption due to a synergistic relationship. Revenues generated by the tax can be used to fund city and county smoking control programs as well as to meet the health insurance system's current financial shortfall.</p