Market-based and non-market-based policies: A quantile approach to environmental technology innovation in G-7 countries

被引:0
作者
Destek, Mehmet Akif [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ]
Ozkan, Oktay [6 ]
Tiwari, Sunil [7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Gaziantep Univ, Dept Econ, Gaziantep, Turkiye
[2] Azerbaijan State Univ Econ UNEC, UNEC Res Methods Applicat Ctr, Istiqlaliyyat Str 6, Baku 1001, Azerbaijan
[3] Korea Univ, Dept Econ, Seoul 02841, South Korea
[4] Western Caspian Univ, Econ & Business, Baku, Azerbaijan
[5] Baku Eurasian Univ, Econ Res Ctr BAAU ERC, Baku, Azerbaijan
[6] Tokat Gaziosmanpasa Univ, Fac Econ & Adm Sci, Dept Business Adm, Tokat, Turkiye
[7] Cent Univ Kerala, Sch Business Studies, Dept Tourism Studies, Periye, India
[8] Korea Univ, Dept Convergence Management, 145 Anam Ro, Seoul 02841, South Korea
关键词
Environmental technologies; Market-based environmental policies; Non-market-based environmental policies; Quantile on quantile technique; GREEN ENERGY; TIME-SERIES; PERFORMANCE; ECONOMY; GROWTH; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124173
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Numerous sanctions and incentives are used in different countries to encourage businesses to implement environmental technology. Market-based environmental policies are used in certain nations, whereas non-marketbased environmental policies are used in others. However, these rules' ability to effectively guide businesses toward research and development is disregarded. In light of this, the purpose of this research is to examine how market-based environmental policies and non-market-based environmental policies affect environmental technology for G-7 nations at various technological progress levels. For this, unique quantile-on-quantile methods are used to study the years between 1990 and 2020. The results of the empirical analysis show that non-marketbased policies is effective in all quantiles for the USA, while market-based policies is successful in all quantiles for Canada and France. Furthermore, differing environmental technology levels for Germany, the UK, Italy, and Japan result in different sorts of successful policies.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]   Sustainability-oriented Innovation: A Systematic Review [J].
Adams, Richard ;
Jeanrenaud, Sally ;
Bessant, John ;
Denyer, David ;
Overy, Patrick .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT REVIEWS, 2016, 18 (02) :180-205
[2]   Evaluating the role of financial globalization and oil consumption on ecological quality: A new perspective from quantile-on-quantile granger causality [J].
Adebayo, Tomiwa Sunday ;
Ozkan, Oktay .
HELIYON, 2024, 10 (02)
[3]   Environmental policies and productivity growth: Evidence across industries and firms [J].
Albrizio, Silvia ;
Kozluk, Tomasz ;
Zipperer, Vera .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2017, 81 :209-226
[4]   The Promise and Problems of Pricing Carbon: Theory and Experience [J].
Aldy, Joseph E. ;
Stavins, Robert N. .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT & DEVELOPMENT, 2012, 21 (02) :152-180
[5]   Examining the patterns of disaggregate energy security risk and crude oil price: the USA scenario over 1970-2040 [J].
Alola, Andrew Adewale ;
Ozkan, Oktay ;
Obekpa, Hephzibah Onyeje .
RESOURCES POLICY, 2023, 82
[6]   Examining crude oil price outlook amidst substitute energy price and household energy expenditure in the USA: A novel nonparametric multivariate QQR approach [J].
Alola, Andrew Adewale ;
Ozkan, Oktay ;
Usman, Ojonugwa .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2023, 120
[7]   Role of Non-Renewable Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in Driving Environmental Sustainability in India: Evidence from the Load Capacity Factor Hypothesis [J].
Alola, Andrew Adewale ;
Ozkan, Oktay ;
Usman, Ojonugwa .
ENERGIES, 2023, 16 (06)
[8]   Panel cointegration with global stochastic trends [J].
Bai, Jushan ;
Kao, Chihwa ;
Ng, Serena .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS, 2009, 149 (01) :82-99
[9]   Tourism development and U.S energy security risks: a KRLS machine learning approach [J].
Balcilar, Mehmet ;
Usman, Ojonugwa ;
Ozkan, Oktay .
CURRENT ISSUES IN TOURISM, 2024, 27 (01) :37-44
[10]   A future for carbon taxes [J].
Baranzini, A ;
Goldemberg, J ;
Speck, S .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2000, 32 (03) :395-412