Can Environmental Regulations Promote Greenhouse Gas Abatement in OECD Countries? Command-and-Control vs. Market-Based Policies

被引:31
作者
Guo, Xu [1 ]
Fu, Lin [2 ]
Sun, Xiaohua [2 ]
机构
[1] Dalian Maritime Univ, Sch Maritime Econ & Management, Dalian 116026, Peoples R China
[2] Dalian Univ Technol, Sch Econ & Management, Dalian 116024, Peoples R China
基金
中国博士后科学基金; 中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
environmental regulations; command-and-control environmental regulations; market-based environmental regulations; GHG emissions; OECD; PRODUCTIVITY EVIDENCE; TECHNICAL PROGRESS; CO2; EMISSIONS; CHINA; EFFICIENCY; REDUCTION; IMPACT; GROWTH; PERFORMANCE; HYPOTHESIS;
D O I
10.3390/su13126913
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In response to global warming, greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement has been one of the top priorities of governments, and a large variety of environmental regulation policies have been implemented in past decades. Using panel data from 27 OECD countries over the period of 2005-2012, this study measures and compares the stringency level of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulations. The differentiated impacts and indirect effects of environmental regulations on GHG emissions are tested empirically. The results show that: (1) Both command-and-control and market-based environmental regulations have effects on GHG abatement in OECD countries, and there is a non-linear relationship between environmental regulations and GHG discharge, in which stringent command-and-control environmental regulations and mild market-based regulation policies are preferred; (2) Command-and-control environmental regulations reduce GHG emissions by improving the technological level, rather than the energy consumption structure. In contrast, market-based environmental regulations can promote GHG abatement through the intermediary effects of both technological progress and the energy consumption structure. The findings provide implications for OECD countries to further reduce GHG emissions.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]   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
[2]   Regulation versus taxation [J].
Alesina, Alberto ;
Passarelli, Francesco .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2014, 110 :147-156
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2014, 1177 OECD EC DEP
[4]   Voluntary emission trading potential of Turkey [J].
Ari, Izzet .
ENERGY POLICY, 2013, 62 :910-919
[5]   Carbon emissions, trade liberalization, and the Japan-ASEAN interaction: A group-wise examination [J].
Atici, Cemal .
JOURNAL OF THE JAPANESE AND INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIES, 2012, 26 (01) :167-178
[6]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[7]  
Berck P., 2018, The theory and practice of command and control in environmental policy
[8]   Efficacy of Command-and-Control and Market-Based Environmental Regulation in Developing Countries [J].
Blackman, Allen ;
Li, Zhengyan ;
Liu, Antung A. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF RESOURCE ECONOMICS, VOL 10, 2018, 10 :381-404
[9]   Foreign direct investment and environmental sustainability in Africa: The role of institutions and governance [J].
Bokpin, Godfred A. .
RESEARCH IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS AND FINANCE, 2017, 39 :239-247
[10]   Measuring the Stringency of Environmental Regulations [J].
Brunel, Claire ;
Levinson, Arik .
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 2016, 10 (01) :47-67