[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/grt/wpegrt/2019-04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dura lex sed lex: why implementation gaps in environmental policy matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Brouillat
  • Maïder Saint-Jean
Abstract
We investigate implementation gaps observed in environmental regulations in the specific case of dangerous chemical substances such as targeted by the REACH regulation. An agent-based model is developed as an exploratory tool to examine to what extent significant implementation gaps between stringency requirements and real but conditional enforcement jeopardize the transition to safer substitutes, by affecting the way heterogeneous actors perceive the regulatory threat and their innovation strategy. We show that the combination of the most severe regulation with the strictest enforcement and the shortest timing would not necessarily lead to the highest frequency of bans on dangerous substances, because it may alter the competitive process that is vital to preserving diversity in innovation strategies and to developing safer substitutes. Opting for a very severe regulation should be combined with concessions on enforcement in order to preserve diversity and to give green pioneering competitors enough time to expand. From a reverse angle, if authorities are keen to apply the regulation strictly and are prepared to face higher market concentration, then they should release the degree of stringency in order to enhance the prospects of transition to safer substitutes.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint-Jean, 2019. "Dura lex sed lex: why implementation gaps in environmental policy matter?," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2019-04, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    • Handle: RePEc:grt:wpegrt:2019-04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cahiersdugretha.u-bordeaux.fr/2019/2019-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Leonardo Bursztyn & David Hemous, 2012. "The Environment and Directed Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 131-166, February.
    2. G. Fagiolo & C. Birchenhall & P. Windrum, 2007. "Empirical Validation in Agent-based Models: Introduction to the Special Issue," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 189-194, October.
    3. W. Reed Walker, 2013. "The Transitional Costs of Sectoral Reallocation: Evidence From the Clean Air Act and the Workforce," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1787-1835.
    4. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    5. Giovanni Marin & Francesca Lotti, 2017. "Productivity effects of eco-innovations using data on eco-patents," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(1), pages 125-148.
    6. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Misato Sato, 2017. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Competitiveness," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 183-206.
    7. Timothy J. Bartik, 2015. "The Social Value of Job Loss and Its Effect on the Costs of U.S. Environmental Regulations," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 179-197.
    8. Arfaoui, Nabila & Brouillat, Eric & Saint Jean, Maïder, 2014. "Policy design and technological substitution: Investigating the REACH regulation in an agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 347-365.
    9. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1991. "The Politics of Government Decision-Making: A Theory of Regulatory Capture," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1089-1127.
    10. Josh Ederington & Jenny Minier, 2003. "Is environmental policy a secondary trade barrier? An empirical analysis," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(1), pages 137-154, February.
    11. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert, 2010. "Environmental innovation and environmental performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 27-42, January.
    12. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    13. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean & Nabila Arfaoui, 2018. "“Reach for the sky”: modeling the impact of policy stringency on industrial dynamics in the case of the REACH regulation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(2), pages 289-320.
    14. Ulrich Wagner & Christopher Timmins, 2009. "Agglomeration Effects in Foreign Direct Investment and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 231-256, June.
    15. Luisa Gagliardi & Giovanni Marin & Caterina Miriello, 2016. "The greener the better? Job creation effects of environmentally-friendly technological change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 779-807.
    16. Jacobsen, Grant D., 2013. "Do economic conditions influence environmental policy? Evidence from the US Senate," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 167-170.
    17. Tanger, Shaun M. & Zeng, Peng & Morse, Wayde & Laband, David N., 2011. "Macroeconomic conditions in the U.S. and congressional voting on environmental policy: 1970-2008," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1109-1120, April.
    18. J. Doyne Farmer & Duncan Foley, 2009. "The economy needs agent-based modelling," Nature, Nature, vol. 460(7256), pages 685-686, August.
    19. Costantini, Valeria & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2012. "On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 132-153.
    20. Damania, Richard & Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A., 2003. "Trade liberalization, corruption, and environmental policy formation: theory and evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 490-512, November.
    21. Alice Castell & Roland Clift & Chris Francae, 2004. "Extended Producer Responsibility Policy in the European Union: A Horse or a Camel?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 8(1‐2), pages 4-7, January.
    22. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    23. Kahn, Matthew E & Matsusaka, John G, 1997. "Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 137-173, April.
    24. Fredriksson, Per G. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2002. "Strategic Interaction and the Determination of Environmental Policy across U.S. States," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 101-122, January.
    25. Claude Henry, 2013. "Incertitude scientifique et incertitude fabriquée. D'une approche rationnelle aux dénis de science," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 64(4), pages 589-598.
    26. Matthew E. Kahn & Matthew J. Kotchen, 2011. "Business Cycle Effects On Concern About Climate Change: The Chilling Effect Of Recession," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(03), pages 257-273.
    27. Burguet, Roberto & Sempere, Jaume, 2003. "Trade liberalization, environmental policy, and welfare," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 25-37, July.
    28. Wayne B. Gray & Jay P. Shimshack, 2011. "The Effectiveness of Environmental Monitoring and Enforcement: A Review of the Empirical Evidence," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    29. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Albert Faber & Annemarth M. Idenburg & Frans H. Oosterhuis, 2007. "Evolutionary Economics and Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12511.
    30. Jeffrey G. Covin & Dennis P. Slevin, 1989. "Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 75-87, January.
    31. Ulph, Alistair, 1996. "Environmental Policy and International Trade when Governments and Producers Act Strategically," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 265-281, May.
    32. Herbert Dawid & Michael Neugart, 2011. "Agent-based Models for Economic Policy Design," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 44-50.
    33. Metcalfe, J S, 1994. "Evolutionary Economics and Technology Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 931-944, July.
    34. Jay P. Shimshack, 2014. "The Economics of Environmental Monitoring and Enforcement," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 339-360, October.
    35. Lamperti, Francesco, 2018. "An information theoretic criterion for empirical validation of simulation models," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 83-106.
    36. Giorgio Fagiolo & Alessio Moneta & Paul Windrum, 2007. "A Critical Guide to Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models in Economics: Methodologies, Procedures, and Open Problems," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 30(3), pages 195-226, October.
    37. Nick Johnstone (ed.), 2007. "Environmental Policy and Corporate Behaviour," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12551.
    38. Jason Vogel, 2004. "Tunnel vision: The regulation of endocrine disruptors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(3), pages 277-303, December.
    39. Luisa Gagliardi & Giovanni Marin & Caterina Miriello, 2014. "The Greener the Better: Job Creation and Environmentally- Friendly Technological Change," IEFE Working Papers 60, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean, 2020. "Mind the gap: Investigating the impact of implementation gaps on cleaner technology transition," Post-Print hal-03490256, HAL.
    2. Brouillat, Eric & Saint Jean, Maïder, 2020. "Mind the gap: Investigating the impact of implementation gaps on cleaner technology transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Paglialunga, Elena, 2018. "The employment impact of private and public actions for energy efficiency: Evidence from European industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 250-267.
    4. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2019. "Academic Inventors and the Antecedents of Green Technologies. A Regional Analysis of Italian Patent Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 247-263.
    5. Luigi Aldieri & Concetto Paolo Vinci, 2018. "Green Economy and Sustainable Development: The Economic Impact of Innovation on Employment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-11, October.
    6. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Giovanni Marin & Susanna Mancinelli & Francesco Nicolli, 2015. "Carbon dioxide reducing environmental innovations, sector upstream/downstream integration and policy: evidence from the EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 709-735, November.
    7. Hille, Erik & Althammer, Wilhelm & Diederich, Henning, 2020. "Environmental regulation and innovation in renewable energy technologies: Does the policy instrument matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    8. Consoli, Davide & Marin, Giovanni & Marzucchi, Alberto & Vona, Francesco, 2016. "Do green jobs differ from non-green jobs in terms of skills and human capital?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1046-1060.
    9. Alessandra Colombelli & Jackie Krafft & Francesco Quatraro, 2021. "Firms’ growth, green gazelles and eco-innovation: evidence from a sample of European firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1721-1738, April.
    10. Marin, Giovanni & Vona, Francesco, 2019. "Climate policies and skill-biased employment dynamics: Evidence from EU countries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    11. Xu, Le & Yang, Lili & Li, Ding & Shao, Shuai, 2023. "Asymmetric effects of heterogeneous environmental standards on green technology innovation: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    12. Dietrich Earnhart & Dylan G. Rassier, 2016. "“Effective regulatory stringency” and firms’ profitability: the effects of effluent limits and government monitoring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 111-145, October.
    13. Davide Antonioli & Grazia Cecere & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2018. "Information communication technologies and environmental innovations in firms: joint adoptions and productivity effects," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(11), pages 1905-1933, September.
    14. Millimet, Daniel L., 2013. "Environmental Federalism: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 7831, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2017. "How does Foreign Direct Investment Affect Pollution? Toward a Better Understanding of the Direct and Conditional Effects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(2), pages 293-338, February.
    16. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5ahh4t5kfl8nprei89ignlk5nl is not listed on IDEAS
    17. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5ahh4t5kfl8nprei89ignlk5nl is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Lamperti, F. & Dosi, G. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2020. "Climate change and green transitions in an agent-based integrated assessment model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. José-Antonio Monteiro & Madina Kukenova, 2008. "Does Lax Environmental Regulation Attract FDI When Accounting For "Third-Country" Effects?," IRENE Working Papers 08-01, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    20. Dincer, Oguzhan C. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2018. "Corruption and environmental regulatory policy in the United States: Does trust matter?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 212-225.
    21. Liu, Donghua & Ren, Shenggang & Li, Wenming, 2022. "SO2 emissions trading and firm exports in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    22. Baomin Dong & Jiong Gong & Xin Zhao, 2012. "FDI and environmental regulation: pollution haven or a race to the top?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 216-237, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technological transition; policy stringency; perception; enforcement; REACH regulation; agent-based model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:grt:wpegrt:2019-04. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ernest Miguelez (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifredfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.