Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling

被引:178
作者
Amacher, GS
Koskela, E
Ollikainen, M
机构
[1] Virginia Polytech Inst & State Univ, Coll Nat Resources, Blacksburg, VA 24601 USA
[2] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Dept Econ, Richmond, VA 23284 USA
[3] Univ Helsinki, Dept Econ, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[4] Univ Helsinki, Dept Econ & Management, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
product differentiation; technology investment; socially optimal quality and investments;
D O I
10.1016/S0095-0696(03)00078-0
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
A three-stage game of investment, environmental quality provision and price competition is developed to study the impact of green technology investment (eco-labeling), in a duopoly model of vertical product differentiation. The firms' incentives to Invest in green technologies depend on their relative cost structure. When firms are identical with respect to fixed costs, both firms will always invest, but if one firm is more efficient in investing, then the other firm may or may not invest depending on the level of unit cost of investment. Quality competition will be tighter when the low-quality firm is more efficient, and looser when the high-quality firm is more efficient in investing. Socially optimal investment for both firms is always positive, but lower than in the duopoly solution. In the absence of environmental externalities, the quality dispersion chosen by profit maximizing firms may be too high or too low, while environmental externalities increase the possibility low-quality dispersion that is too low within the market solution. Finally, and importantly, ecolabeling can be used as a means of reducing excessive investment and increasing environmental quality that is too low. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:284 / 306
页数:23
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   Bargaining in environmental regulation and the ideal regulator [J].
Amacher, GS ;
Malik, AS .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1996, 30 (02) :233-253
[2]   Pollution taxes when firms choose technologies [J].
Amacher, GS ;
Malik, AS .
SOUTHERN ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 2002, 68 (04) :891-906
[3]  
Anderson S.P., 1992, DISCRETE CHOICE THEO
[4]   AN EXPERIMENT IN VOLUNTARY ENVIRONMENTAL-REGULATION - PARTICIPATION IN EPAS 33/50 PROGRAM [J].
ARORA, S ;
CASON, TN .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1995, 28 (03) :271-286
[5]   Toward a theoretical model of voluntary overcompliance [J].
Arora, S ;
Gangopadhyay, S .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 1995, 28 (03) :289-309
[6]  
ASHFORD N, 1997, 1697 CAMBR U PRESS F
[7]   POLLUTION REGULATION AND INCENTIVES FOR POLLUTION-CONTROL RESEARCH [J].
Biglaiser, Gary ;
Horowitz, John K. .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, 1994, 3 (04) :663-684
[8]   Remarks on good vs. bad characteristics in vertical differentiation [J].
Bontems, P ;
Réquillart, V .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2001, 70 (03) :427-429
[9]   Optimal taxation, public goods and environmental policy with involuntary unemployment [J].
Bovenberg, AL ;
vanderPloeg, F .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1996, 62 (1-2) :59-83
[10]   MULTIMARKET OLIGOPOLY - STRATEGIC SUBSTITUTES AND COMPLEMENTS [J].
BULOW, JI ;
GEANAKOPLOS, JD ;
KLEMPERER, PD .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1985, 93 (03) :488-511