董 穎,石 磊
(1.浙江科技學(xué)院經(jīng)濟(jì)管理學(xué)院,杭州 310023;2.清華大學(xué)環(huán)境學(xué)院,國家環(huán)境保護(hù)生態(tài)工業(yè)重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室,北京 100084)
環(huán)境管制能否引致生態(tài)創(chuàng)新并進(jìn)而增強(qiáng)企業(yè)或國家的競爭力一直是生態(tài)創(chuàng)新領(lǐng)域的焦點(diǎn)問題。20世紀(jì)90年代初期,哈佛大學(xué)的波特及其合作者認(rèn)為,恰當(dāng)?shù)沫h(huán)境管制可以激勵(lì)企業(yè)開發(fā)和采納生態(tài)創(chuàng)新,從而為本國企業(yè)建立起綠色市場上的競爭優(yōu)勢(shì)[1],這就是著名的波特假說。其后20年,出現(xiàn)了大量的研究試圖從理論或?qū)嵶C兩方面來證實(shí)或證偽波特假說是否成立,甚至專門組織研討會(huì)進(jìn)行討論[2]。
時(shí)至今日,波特假說仍然具有強(qiáng)烈的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,對(duì)于當(dāng)下的中國尤其如此。我國一方面提出堅(jiān)持科學(xué)發(fā)展觀、走新型工業(yè)化道路、建設(shè)資源節(jié)約型和環(huán)境友好型社會(huì),環(huán)境管制日漸加強(qiáng);另一方面又提出建設(shè)創(chuàng)新型國家,2020年進(jìn)入創(chuàng)新型國家行列的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)。因此,以創(chuàng)新尤其是以生態(tài)為導(dǎo)向的創(chuàng)新來支撐我國的生態(tài)化發(fā)展以及國家綜合競爭力的提升成為我國必然的戰(zhàn)略選擇[3-4]。在這種態(tài)勢(shì)下,厘清環(huán)境管制、生態(tài)創(chuàng)新和競爭優(yōu)勢(shì)的關(guān)系,無論對(duì)于企業(yè)還是對(duì)于國家都有著重大的戰(zhàn)略意義。本文從波特假說的內(nèi)涵解析入手,評(píng)述波特假說在理論與實(shí)證兩方面的進(jìn)展,并在此基礎(chǔ)上給出研究展望。
環(huán)境問題引致了世界范圍內(nèi)的生態(tài)化實(shí)踐,在此過程中創(chuàng)新的作用逐漸得到凸顯,由此涌現(xiàn)了一系列的概念,例如環(huán)境技術(shù)創(chuàng)新、環(huán)境創(chuàng)新、綠色創(chuàng)新、可持續(xù)創(chuàng)新和生態(tài)創(chuàng)新等。這些概念之間的差別并不大,都是指向在產(chǎn)品(或服務(wù))、生產(chǎn)過程、市場方法、組織結(jié)構(gòu)或制度安排等方面所采取的新的或顯著改善的行為,這些行為與其它替代方案比較能夠帶來環(huán)境方面的改善[5]。
鑒于歐盟[6]和經(jīng)合組織(OECD)[7]等國際組織以生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的名義開展了最為系統(tǒng)的系列研究,文獻(xiàn)也越來越趨向于以生態(tài)創(chuàng)新為名義來發(fā)表該領(lǐng)域的研究成果,因此本文在此采用了生態(tài)創(chuàng)新來指代能夠帶來環(huán)境改善的創(chuàng)新行為。
大多數(shù)文獻(xiàn)認(rèn)為,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新與一般創(chuàng)新在過程上并沒有本質(zhì)區(qū)別,即同樣都包含研究、開發(fā)、試制、生產(chǎn)、傳播等環(huán)節(jié)及其之間的互動(dòng),也同樣是由技術(shù)、組織和制度變革共同構(gòu)成的組合系統(tǒng),所不同的是生態(tài)創(chuàng)新能夠帶來環(huán)境績效的改善。環(huán)境維度的加入給生態(tài)創(chuàng)新帶來了一些不同于一般創(chuàng)新的顯著特性,例如雙重外部性[8]、技術(shù)推動(dòng)與市場拉動(dòng)效應(yīng)的特殊性[9]以及環(huán)境管制的推/拉效應(yīng)[10-11]。環(huán)境問題公認(rèn)的外部性,使得不同的環(huán)境管制手段對(duì)于不同的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型甚至對(duì)不同的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新階段所產(chǎn)生的作用不同,有些能夠起到推動(dòng)作用,有些則可能起到阻礙作用。這些作用的不同導(dǎo)致了環(huán)境管制與生態(tài)創(chuàng)新關(guān)系的復(fù)雜性。一般而言,存在兩種對(duì)立的觀點(diǎn):一種是零和觀點(diǎn),即企業(yè)利益與社會(huì)利益不能兩全,環(huán)境管制會(huì)給企業(yè)帶來額外成本,削弱企業(yè)的競爭力;另一種是雙贏觀點(diǎn),認(rèn)為環(huán)境管制雖然會(huì)帶給企業(yè)額外的成本,但它可以激發(fā)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新以此進(jìn)行補(bǔ)償并最終能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)兩者的雙贏。
雙贏觀點(diǎn)就是波特假說。波特等認(rèn)為恰當(dāng)?shù)沫h(huán)境管制可以激勵(lì)企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新,從而為本國企業(yè)建立起市場競爭優(yōu)勢(shì),理由包括:
1)環(huán)境管制會(huì)使企業(yè)認(rèn)識(shí)到資源利用缺乏效率并指明了可能的技術(shù)改進(jìn)方向;
2)環(huán)境管制可以提高企業(yè)環(huán)保意識(shí);
3)環(huán)境管制可以降低投資的不確定性;
4)環(huán)境管制可以給企業(yè)帶來壓力促使其創(chuàng)新和發(fā)展;
5)環(huán)境管制會(huì)改變傳統(tǒng)的競爭環(huán)境[10]。也就是說,環(huán)境管理可“強(qiáng)制”企業(yè)意識(shí)到生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益[12]。
自波特假說提出以來,大量文獻(xiàn)圍繞四個(gè)方面開展了研究:
1)波特假說的理論模型構(gòu)建及闡釋;
2)基于已有觀察數(shù)據(jù)的計(jì)量分析;
3)精心設(shè)計(jì)的抽樣調(diào)查分析;
4)案例分析。
波特假說存在的理論基礎(chǔ)是對(duì)企業(yè)利潤最大化假設(shè)的偏離,偏離的原因在于“組織失靈”或“市場失靈”[2]。按照主流經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)理論,企業(yè)是追求利潤最大化的,但現(xiàn)實(shí)世界中由于企業(yè)管理者的有限理性、避害偏好或其他原因而導(dǎo)致不去進(jìn)行生態(tài)創(chuàng)新,由此產(chǎn)生所謂的“組織失靈”現(xiàn)象;另一方面,由于信息不對(duì)稱或市場的不完全競爭或者公共品等特征,也會(huì)出現(xiàn)“市場失靈”現(xiàn)象。為了更好地理解波特假說,Andre等提出了垂直分化的雙寡頭模型[13],后Lambertinia和Tampieria改進(jìn)了這一模型并刻畫出波特假說得以成立的區(qū)域,認(rèn)為波特假說適用于囚徒困境形式的均衡[14]。只要綠色技術(shù)與棕色技術(shù)之間成本參數(shù)的不對(duì)稱性不要太高,在沒有環(huán)境監(jiān)管的情況下,企業(yè)也可以自發(fā)地進(jìn)行生態(tài)創(chuàng)新。
無論是組織失靈還是市場失靈,都源于外部性或溢出效應(yīng)的存在,即單個(gè)企業(yè)的活動(dòng)對(duì)其他企業(yè)或主體的外部影響。事實(shí)上,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新中的“生態(tài)”和“創(chuàng)新”兩個(gè)要素都可以引致外部性。就“生態(tài)”而言,環(huán)境問題因其“公共品”屬性而具有負(fù)的外部性,但更多的企業(yè)采用生態(tài)創(chuàng)新可以有效改善環(huán)境績效,從而使得生態(tài)創(chuàng)新具有正的溢出效應(yīng);就“創(chuàng)新”而言,創(chuàng)新因?yàn)榇嬖诰薮蟮娘L(fēng)險(xiǎn)在研發(fā)階段具有明顯的外部性,而在傳播階段具有明顯的正的溢出效應(yīng)。因此,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新同時(shí)具有生態(tài)環(huán)境和創(chuàng)新兩個(gè)方面的外部性,依據(jù)是否是創(chuàng)新主體以及所處的創(chuàng)新階段具有正的或負(fù)的溢出效應(yīng)。Rennings將生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的這種屬性界定為“雙重外部性”[8]。雙重外部性的存在導(dǎo)致了環(huán)境管制對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的推/拉效應(yīng)。
在實(shí)踐中,企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新是一個(gè)復(fù)雜的動(dòng)態(tài)過程。在這個(gè)過程中,有很多因素影響著企業(yè)是否進(jìn)行生態(tài)創(chuàng)新、何種類型的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新以及生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的強(qiáng)度和績效。歐盟“測量生態(tài)創(chuàng)新(MEI)”項(xiàng)目系統(tǒng)總結(jié)了企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的影響因素,包括:金融資源、人力資源、研發(fā)支出、環(huán)境政策框架、環(huán)境管理要素、預(yù)期市場需求、盈利狀況、市場競爭狀況、創(chuàng)新合作狀況、利益相關(guān)者等[6]。這些因素大致可歸為3大類,即生態(tài)創(chuàng)新本身技術(shù)特征、創(chuàng)新者特性和創(chuàng)新環(huán)境條件。其中,創(chuàng)新環(huán)境條件可以進(jìn)一步區(qū)分為市場因素、環(huán)境政策等外部因素。
波特假說意在探討生態(tài)創(chuàng)新與環(huán)境管制的關(guān)系,其隱含的一個(gè)條件就是環(huán)境管制需要對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新產(chǎn)生作用甚至是主導(dǎo)性的作用。大多數(shù)研究已經(jīng)驗(yàn)證了這一點(diǎn),即環(huán)境管制是生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的決定因素之一。相對(duì)于一般創(chuàng)新,環(huán)境管制將會(huì)大大影響或支持生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的需求/拉動(dòng)效應(yīng),例如規(guī)制或稅收會(huì)刺激消費(fèi)者的內(nèi)外部動(dòng)機(jī),需求拉動(dòng)工具主要是作用于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的應(yīng)用或傳播[15]。文獻(xiàn)[16]認(rèn)為生態(tài)創(chuàng)新與一般創(chuàng)新的影響因素不盡然相同,如環(huán)境規(guī)制及其執(zhí)行甚至對(duì)企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新起決定性作用。
因此,隨著對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型、績效及其影響因素相互關(guān)系的探討,人們逐漸認(rèn)識(shí)到波特假說在邏輯上實(shí)際包含兩個(gè)環(huán)節(jié):第一個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)是環(huán)境管制與生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的關(guān)系,恰當(dāng)?shù)沫h(huán)境管制會(huì)刺激企業(yè)進(jìn)行生態(tài)創(chuàng)新;第二個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)是生態(tài)創(chuàng)新與企業(yè)競爭力的關(guān)系[17]。按照生態(tài)創(chuàng)新定義,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新必然能夠改善企業(yè)的環(huán)境績效,但未必能夠提升競爭優(yōu)勢(shì)。根據(jù)涵蓋環(huán)節(jié)的不同,可以區(qū)分出“弱”與“強(qiáng)”的波特假說?!叭酢钡牟ㄌ丶僬f只是針對(duì)第一個(gè)環(huán)節(jié),即環(huán)境管制可以刺激生態(tài)創(chuàng)新;“強(qiáng)”的波特假說則涵蓋兩個(gè)環(huán)節(jié),即環(huán)境管制可以刺激生態(tài)創(chuàng)新并進(jìn)而提升企業(yè)競爭力,如圖1所示。
圖1 波特假說圖解Fig.1 The Porter Hypothesis
大部分實(shí)證研究都證實(shí)了弱的波特假說,也就是說環(huán)境管制會(huì)刺激生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的發(fā)生,如表1所示。爭議主要存在于以下方面:
(1)不同類型的環(huán)境管制會(huì)刺激不同類型的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新。例如,歐盟IMPRESS(The Impact of Clean Production on Employment in Europe-An analysis using Surveys and Case Studies)項(xiàng)目研究認(rèn)為:隨著政策的變化,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類別會(huì)發(fā)生變化。當(dāng)政策強(qiáng)調(diào)對(duì)污染排放的控制時(shí),生態(tài)創(chuàng)新側(cè)重于最終處理過程技術(shù);當(dāng)政策轉(zhuǎn)為強(qiáng)調(diào)污染的防范時(shí),生態(tài)創(chuàng)新重心也隨之轉(zhuǎn)為清潔技術(shù)[17]。
(2)導(dǎo)致生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的環(huán)境管制關(guān)鍵要素和作用機(jī)理可能不同。20世紀(jì)90年代以來,一些實(shí)證研究認(rèn)為環(huán)境管制調(diào)控的效果取決于環(huán)境管制手段及其執(zhí)行方式。例如,IMPRESS項(xiàng)目研究表明,環(huán)境法律法規(guī)的要求以及提升企業(yè)公眾形象是企業(yè)實(shí)施各類生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的最關(guān)鍵動(dòng)機(jī)。Oltra認(rèn)為,管制的設(shè)計(jì)是可能會(huì)影響企業(yè)創(chuàng)新反應(yīng)的一個(gè)關(guān)鍵因素,尤其是當(dāng)考慮到其嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)性、靈活性和限制的不確定性[18]。Frondel等基于OECD實(shí)證研究,認(rèn)為重點(diǎn)是政策嚴(yán)格性和執(zhí)法情況會(huì)決定企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新決策[19]。Ashford等認(rèn)為,雖然政策嚴(yán)格性是企業(yè)創(chuàng)新反應(yīng)的最重要因素,但靈活的遵守手段和遵守時(shí)限也有助于刺激替代技術(shù)[20]。因此政策調(diào)控的影響取決于政策類型和執(zhí)行方式。
(3)環(huán)境管制對(duì)企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的研發(fā)和采用是否起到了關(guān)鍵的主導(dǎo)作用。企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新是一件復(fù)雜的事情,不僅受到環(huán)境管制的影響,也受到行業(yè)技術(shù)因素、市場因素以及企業(yè)自身因素的影響。對(duì)于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新,環(huán)境法規(guī)政策和創(chuàng)新扶持可能有著重要的作用。但是,這些規(guī)制并不是獨(dú)立于技術(shù)之外的,政策/政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)技術(shù)之間存在著一種復(fù)雜的相互作用,政策的制定與實(shí)施需要基于對(duì)技術(shù)經(jīng)濟(jì)的評(píng)估以及對(duì)污染控制的社會(huì)需求。
事實(shí)上,那些不支持波特假說的研究,都試圖證明環(huán)境管制并非企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的主導(dǎo)因素。例如,一些學(xué)者從需求或供應(yīng)方等角度來分析[21],有些認(rèn)為不同的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型有著不同的影響因素,認(rèn)為節(jié)約成本和提高生產(chǎn)力是生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的決定因素,尤其是對(duì)生態(tài)工藝創(chuàng)新和清潔技術(shù)[22-23]。Frondel等認(rèn)為清潔技術(shù)創(chuàng)新往往是被成本節(jié)約和規(guī)制所驅(qū)動(dòng)[19]。
對(duì)于強(qiáng)波特假說,現(xiàn)有研究結(jié)論不盡統(tǒng)一,如表2所示。其矛盾的核心其實(shí)主要在于環(huán)境績效與競爭績效能否統(tǒng)一。多數(shù)學(xué)者認(rèn)為,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新所帶來的環(huán)境績效可以為企業(yè)取得競爭優(yōu)勢(shì)創(chuàng)造有利條件,比如通過污染防治提高資源利用率取得成本領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢(shì),或者通過生產(chǎn)綠色產(chǎn)品取得差異化優(yōu)勢(shì)從而獲得高額的市場回報(bào)等。Klassen和Mclaughlin進(jìn)一步認(rèn)為,企業(yè)環(huán)境績效(例如,企業(yè)受到的環(huán)境獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)或懲罰)會(huì)影響投資人對(duì)企業(yè)未來經(jīng)濟(jì)績效的預(yù)期,于是,在有效市場中,股票價(jià)格將反映環(huán)境績效的經(jīng)濟(jì)收益,他們通過實(shí)證分析發(fā)現(xiàn)企業(yè)環(huán)境績效與經(jīng)濟(jì)績效之間存在正相關(guān)關(guān)系[24]。Orlitzky等[25]以及 Margolis和Walsh[26]采用元分析方法對(duì)過去30a的相關(guān)研究進(jìn)行了分析,結(jié)果表明企業(yè)環(huán)境績效與經(jīng)濟(jì)績效呈現(xiàn)略微的正相關(guān)性并具有統(tǒng)計(jì)顯著性,然而不同研究的結(jié)論差異性很大,有的顯著負(fù)相關(guān),有的則顯著正相關(guān)。盡管如此,大多數(shù)實(shí)證研究和綜述認(rèn)為企業(yè)并不會(huì)因?yàn)槠涓纳骗h(huán)境績效而遭受經(jīng)濟(jì)懲罰[27]。
另一方面,對(duì)這種正相關(guān)的觀點(diǎn)也存在相當(dāng)多的質(zhì)疑。Walley和Whitehead認(rèn)為,有經(jīng)濟(jì)效益的環(huán)境改進(jìn)項(xiàng)目和活動(dòng)應(yīng)該早已在市場中自動(dòng)實(shí)現(xiàn)[28]。換言之,企業(yè)是在政府管制下才被動(dòng)地改善其環(huán)境績效的。在政府強(qiáng)制條件下提高環(huán)境績效可能迫使企業(yè)增加成本,從而損害其競爭優(yōu)勢(shì),所以兩者有可能是負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系或者相關(guān)性不顯著。Stanwick P.A.和Stanwick S.D.通過對(duì)多個(gè)行業(yè)共120多家企業(yè)的研究發(fā)現(xiàn),企業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)績效與排污總量數(shù)據(jù)之間存在顯著的正相關(guān)關(guān)系,他們據(jù)此認(rèn)為經(jīng)濟(jì)績效與環(huán)境績效是負(fù)相關(guān)關(guān)系[29]。
事實(shí)上,企業(yè)競爭力受制于很多因素的影響,如需求因素、要素條件、相關(guān)和支持產(chǎn)業(yè)、競爭對(duì)手和創(chuàng)新環(huán)境(教育、技術(shù)、知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的權(quán)利等等)[30]。因此,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的分析應(yīng)更多地側(cè)重于各種影響因素復(fù)雜的相互作用以及企業(yè)競爭力和環(huán)境績效之間的關(guān)系。Russo和Fouts從企業(yè)的資源基礎(chǔ)理論的角度來探討企業(yè)環(huán)境績效與經(jīng)濟(jì)績效的關(guān)系,通過對(duì)243家企業(yè)的分析發(fā)現(xiàn)兩者之間是正相關(guān)的,而行業(yè)增長速度等因素對(duì)兩者關(guān)系有影響[31]。Sharma和Vredenburg認(rèn)為主動(dòng)的環(huán)境戰(zhàn)略有助于企業(yè)通過持續(xù)創(chuàng)新和學(xué)習(xí)等途徑加強(qiáng)組織資源和能力[32]。Christmann通過對(duì)美國88家化工企業(yè)的實(shí)證分析發(fā)現(xiàn)組織內(nèi)部的互補(bǔ)性資產(chǎn)顯著影響企業(yè)環(huán)境管理的最佳實(shí)踐與企業(yè)成本優(yōu)勢(shì)(經(jīng)濟(jì)績效的一個(gè)重要決定因素)之間的關(guān)系[33]。因此,近來的研究重點(diǎn)轉(zhuǎn)向之一是在何種條件下環(huán)境管制會(huì)促進(jìn)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新并最終提升企業(yè)的競爭力。
綜合上述理論研究和實(shí)證研究,發(fā)現(xiàn)對(duì)于波特假說的確如所爭議的一樣,環(huán)境政策對(duì)于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的確具有正向或負(fù)向的影響。影響的作用方向和強(qiáng)度取決于環(huán)境政策的類型、生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的類型、生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的不同階段以及管制對(duì)象本身的一些特性等。其政策啟示可以大致歸結(jié)為如下4個(gè)方面:
(1)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新具有不同的類型,不同類型受環(huán)境管制的作用及效果有所不同,因此對(duì)波特假說的驗(yàn)證與否需要區(qū)分生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型。事實(shí)上,現(xiàn)有文獻(xiàn)對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型區(qū)分不足,文獻(xiàn)[34]認(rèn)為生態(tài)創(chuàng)新需要分為末端治理、工藝創(chuàng)新、產(chǎn)品創(chuàng)新和組織創(chuàng)新四種類型,不同類型的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新對(duì)環(huán)境管制的響應(yīng)并不相同,對(duì)不同類型的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新如果不加以區(qū)分,則往往導(dǎo)致研究結(jié)論過于籠統(tǒng),缺乏針對(duì)性;
(2)在生態(tài)創(chuàng)新研究中,管制者與管制對(duì)象的關(guān)系并不是單向維度的,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新可能受到多個(gè)政策的多重影響,這就意味著“刺激-響應(yīng)”的研究模型可能過于簡單[35]。現(xiàn)有文獻(xiàn)對(duì)環(huán)境管制的作用機(jī)理研究不足,沒有深入探討環(huán)境管制對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新不同階段的作用,對(duì)如何影響企業(yè)環(huán)境績效和競爭績效的內(nèi)在機(jī)理缺乏系統(tǒng)研究;
(3)環(huán)境政策工具對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的影響可能更依賴于政策設(shè)計(jì)的特性而不僅僅是政策類型的選擇,這些特性包括管制嚴(yán)厲程度、政策的可預(yù)期性、行業(yè)以及企業(yè)規(guī)模的差異、時(shí)效性、政策與未來標(biāo)準(zhǔn)匹配的可信性、監(jiān)管有效性、執(zhí)法力度和政策相互之間的匹配性等[35]?,F(xiàn)有文獻(xiàn)對(duì)于環(huán)境管制的累積效應(yīng)和疊加效應(yīng)研究不足,現(xiàn)實(shí)中環(huán)境管制往往是多種手段共同施加、相互作用,由此帶來的疊加效應(yīng)和累積效應(yīng)值得關(guān)注;
(4)對(duì)于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新總體而言,可能并不存在唯一的最佳的環(huán)境政策,生態(tài)學(xué)上的因地制宜原則同樣適用于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新領(lǐng)域。
生態(tài)創(chuàng)新仍然是一個(gè)新興的研究領(lǐng)域,在實(shí)踐中表現(xiàn)出復(fù)雜的多樣性,因產(chǎn)業(yè)的不同及國家/地區(qū)的不同而不同。對(duì)發(fā)展中國家和轉(zhuǎn)型國家的實(shí)證研究薄弱。尤其我國的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新研究,無論是實(shí)證研究還是理論研究都才剛起步,這與出臺(tái)與實(shí)踐大量、密集的環(huán)境政策的現(xiàn)實(shí)要求很不匹配。本文認(rèn)為,在環(huán)境管制與生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的關(guān)系研究上,急需加強(qiáng)以下方面的工作:
(1)進(jìn)一步的理論研究,尤其是從演化經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的角度研究生態(tài)創(chuàng)新體系(綠色學(xué)習(xí)曲線),考察環(huán)境政策、路徑依賴性、變化累積性等對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的結(jié)構(gòu)、模式特征和演進(jìn)路徑的影響。生態(tài)創(chuàng)新不僅僅是追求立竿見影的環(huán)境目標(biāo),更強(qiáng)調(diào)長期政策來促進(jìn)國家創(chuàng)新系統(tǒng)中的生態(tài)創(chuàng)新。而相反地,創(chuàng)新則是一個(gè)分布式過程——在知識(shí)和資源方面的投入是在眾多參與者及貢獻(xiàn)者之間分配的,存在相互關(guān)聯(lián)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)關(guān)系。此外,它還是一個(gè)動(dòng)態(tài)的過程,包括社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)域的學(xué)習(xí)及變革;
(2)研究尺度的拓展,從企業(yè)尺度拓展到行業(yè)、區(qū)域和國家尺度,應(yīng)深入研究國家層面上不同的管制體制和社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)背景如何影響生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的模式、路徑及其績效;
(3)加強(qiáng)對(duì)環(huán)境政策累積效應(yīng)和疊加效應(yīng)的研究。政策往往并不是單獨(dú)起作用的,而是多個(gè)政策同時(shí)對(duì)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新產(chǎn)生作用。這種作用可能是協(xié)同且相互加強(qiáng)的,也可能是相互沖突的。因此,政策的累積效應(yīng)和疊加效應(yīng)對(duì)于生態(tài)創(chuàng)新值得研究;
(4)針對(duì)中國的實(shí)證研究和應(yīng)用。一方面,以生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型的界定與劃分為起點(diǎn),構(gòu)建中國企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新“特征—能力—績效”的機(jī)制模型,研究不同生態(tài)創(chuàng)新類型及環(huán)境政策對(duì)企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新績效的作用差異;另一方面,加強(qiáng)應(yīng)用實(shí)踐,為中國企業(yè)和政府進(jìn)行生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的實(shí)施與管理提供理論指導(dǎo)與決策支持。
表1 弱波特假說的計(jì)量經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)研究Table 1 The econometrics research on“Weak Porter Hypothesis”
續(xù)表
續(xù)表
續(xù)表
續(xù)表
表2 強(qiáng)波特假說的計(jì)量經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)研究Table 2 The econometrics research on“Strong Porter Hypothesis”
續(xù)表
續(xù)表
[1]Porter M.America's green strategy.Scientific American,1991,264(4):168.
[2]Ambec S,Cohen M A,Elgie S,Lanoie P.The Porter Hypothesis at 20:Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness.CIRANO Scientific Series,August 2010[2012-02-16].http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2010s-29.pdf.
[3]Research Group for Sustainable Development Strategy at Chinese Academy of Sciences.2006 China Sustainable Development Strategy Report.Beijing:Science Press,2006.
[4]Zhu D J.Green Innovation.Shanghai:Tongji University Press,2008.
[5]Dong Y.The Mechanism of Corporate Eco-innovation[D].Zhejiang:Zhejiang University,2011
[6]Kemp R,Pearson P.Final report MEI project about measuring eco-innovation.Measuring Eco-innovation Project(MEI),2007.
[7]OECD.Sustainable Manufacturing and Eco-innovation,OECD,Paris,2009.
[8]Rennings,K.Redefining innovation-eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics,Ecological Economics,2000,32(2),319-332.
[9]Pavitt K.Sectoral patterns of technical change:towards taxonomy and a theory.Research Policy,1984,14(4),182-188.
[10]Porter M E,Linde C V D.Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship.The Journal of Economic Perspectives,1995,9(4),97-118.
[11]Faucheux S,Nicola? I.Environmental technological change and governance in sustainable development policy.Ecological Economics,1998,27(3),243-256.
[12]Belin J,Horbach J,Oltra V.Environmental innovations:Indicators,stylized facts and sector analyses.DIME working paper,June 2009[2012-02-16].http://www.dime-eu.org/wp25.
[13]André F J,González P,Porteiro,N.Strategic quality competition and the Porter hypothesis.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2009,57,182-194.
[14]Lambertini L,Tampieri A.Vertical differentiation in a Cournot industry:The Porter hypothesis and beyond.Resource and Energy Economics,2012,34(3),374-380.
[15]Horbach J,Rammer C,Rennings K.Determinants of eco-innovations by type of environmental impact— The role of regulatory push/pull,technologypush and market pull.Ecological Economics,2012,78,112-122.
[16]Nameroff T,Garant R,Albert M B.Adoption of green chemistry:an analysis based on US patents.Research Policy,2004,33(6/7):959-974.
[17]Kemp R,Arundel A.Survey indicators for environmental innovation.IDEA report,STEP Group,Oslo,1998.
[18]Oltra V.Environmental innovation and industrial dynamics:the contributions of evolutionary economics.DIME working paper,December 2008[2012-02-16].http://www.dime-eu.org/files/active/0/DIME_WP_n7_oltra.pdf
[19]Frondel M,Horbach J,Rennings K.End-of-pipe or cleaner production:an empirical comparison of environmental innovation decisions across OECD countries.Business Strategy and the Environment,2007,16(8):571-584.
[20]Ashford N A,Ayers C,Stone R F.Using regulation to change the market for innovation.Harvard Environmental Law Review,1985,9(2):419-466.
[21]Brouwer E,Kleinknecht A.Firm size,small business presence and sales of innovative products:a micro-econometric analysis.Small Business Economics,1996,8:189-201.
[22]Cleff T,Rennings K.Determinants of environmental product and process innovation.European Environment,1999,9(5):191-201.
[23]Rehfeld K,Rennings K,Ziegler A.Integrated product policy and environmental product innovations:an empirical analysis.Ecological Economics,2007,61(1):91-100.
[24]Klassen R D,Mclaughlin C P.The impact of environmental management on firm performance.Management Science,1996,42(8):1199-1214.
[25]Orlitzky M,Schmidt F,Rynes S.Corporate social and financial performance:a meta-analysis.Organization Studies,2003,24(3):403-441.
[26]Margolis J,Walsh J.Misery loves companies:Rethinking social initiatives by business.Administrative Science Quarterly,2003,48(2):268-305.
[27]Boons F,Wagner M.Assessing the relationship between economic and ecological performance:Distinguishing system levels and the role of innovation.Ecological Economics,2009,68(7):1908-1914.
[28]Walley N,Whitehead B.Its not easy being green.Harvard Business Review,May/June 1994,46-52.
[29]Stanwick P A,Stanwick S D.The relationship between corporate social performance,and organizational size,financial performance,and environmental performance:an empirical examination.Journal of Business Ethics,1998,17(2):195-204.
[30]Kemp R,F(xiàn)oxon T.Eco-innovation from an innovation dynamics perspective:Deliverable 1 of MEI project(D1).Measuring Eco-innovation Project(MEI),2007.
[31]Russo M V,F(xiàn)outs P A.A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability.The Academy of Management Journal,1997,40(3):534-559.
[32]Sharma S,Vredenburg H.Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable.Strategic Management Journal,1998,19(8):729-753.
[33]Christmann P.Effects of“best practices”of environmental management on cost advantage:the role of complementary assets.The Academy of Management Journal,2000,43(4):663-680.
[34]Dong Y,Shi L.Eco-innova tion:Conception,hierarchy and research progress.Acta Ecologica Sinica,30(9):2465-2474.
[35]Kemp,R.,& Pontoglio,S.The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments— A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?Ecological Economics,2011,72,28-36.
[36]Nelson R A,Tietenberg T,Donihue M R.Differential environmental regulation:Effects on electric utility capital turnover and emissions.The Review of Economics and Statistics,1993,75(2):368-373.
[37]Green K,McMeekin A,Irwin A.Technological trajectories and R&D for environmental innovation in UK firms.Futures,1994,26(10):1047-1059.
[38]Arora S,Cason T N.An experiment in voluntary environmental regulation:Participation in EPA's 33/50 Program.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1995,28(1):271-286.
[39]Henriques I,Sadorsky P.The determinants of an environmentally responsive firm:an empirical approach.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1996,30(3):381-395.
[40]Hettige H,Huq M,Pargal S,Pargal D.Determinants of pollution abatement in developing countries:Evidence from South and Southeast Asia.World Development,1996,24(12):1891-1904.
[41]Jaffe A B,Palmer K.Environmental regulation and innovation:a panel data study.The Review of Economics and Statistics,1997,79(4):610-619.
[42]Sanchez C M.Environmental regulation and firm level innovation:the moderating effects of organizational and individual level variables.Business Society,1997,36(2):140-168.
[43]DeCanio S,Watkins W.Investment in energy efficiency:Do the characteristics of firms matter.Review of Economics and Statistics,1998,80(1):95-107.
[44]Blackmana A,Bannister G J.Community pressure and clean technology in the informal sector:an econometric analysis of the adoption of propane by traditional Mexican brickmakers.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1998,35(1):1-21.
[45]Pickman,H.The effect of environmental regulation on environmental innovation.Business Strategy and the Environment,1998,7(4):223-233.
[46]Gray W,Shadbegian R J.Environmental regulation investment timing and technology choice.The Journal of Industrial Economics,1998,46(2):235-256.
[47]Brunnermeier S,Cohen M A.Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries.Journal of Environmental Economics andManagement,2003,45(2):278-293.
[48]Montalvo C C.Sustainable production and consumption systems-cooperation for change:Assessing and simulating the willingness of the firm to adopt/develop cleaner technologies.The case of the In-Bond industry in northern Mexico.Journal of Cleaner Production,2003,11(4):411-426.
[49]Snyder L,Miller N,Stavins R N.The effects of environmental regulation on technology diffusion:the case of chlorine manufacturing.The American Economic Review,2003,93(2):431-435.
[50]Popp D.Lessons from patents:Using patents to measure technological change in environmental models.Ecological Economics,2005,54(2/3):209-226.
[51]Park Y S.A study on the determinants of environmental innovation in Korean energy intensive industry.International Review of Public Administration,2005,9(2):89-101.
[52]Cole M,Elliott R JR,Shimamoto K.Industrial characteristics,environmental regulations and air pollution:an analysis of the UK manufacturing sector.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2005,50(1):121-143.
[53]Doonan J,Lanoie P,Laplante B.Determinants of environmental performance in the Canadian pulp and paper industry:an assessment from inside the industry.Ecological Economics,2005,55(1):73-84.
[54]Rennings K,Ziegler A,Ankele K,Hoffmann E.The influence of different characteristics of the EU environmental management and auditing scheme on technical environmental innovations and economic performance.Ecological Economics,2006,57(1):45-59.
[55]Hamamoto M.Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries.Resource and Energy Economics,2006,28(4):299-312.
[56]Gangadharan L.Environmental compliance by firms in the manufacturing sector in Mexico.Ecological Economics,2006,59(4):477-486.
[57]Johnstone N,Labonne J.Environmental policy,management and R&D.OECD Economic Studies,2006,42:169-203.
[58]Mazzanti M,Zoboli R.Examining the factors influencing environmental innovations.FEEM working paper,January 2006[2012-02-16].http://www.feem.it/getpage.aspx?id=1518&sez=Publications&padre=73.
[59]Seroa da Motta R.Analyzing the environmental performance of the Brazilian industrial sector.Ecological Economics,2006,57(2):269-281.
[60]Ofezu G.Reflections on Environmental Policy and Contribution to Environmental Innovation Adoption in the Pulp and Paper Industry[D].Syracuse(NY):College of Environmental Science and Forestry,State University of New York,2006.
[61]Sanyal P.The effect of deregulation on environmental research by electric utilities.Journal of Regulatory Economics,2007,31(3):335-353.
[62]Frondel M,Horbach J,Rennings K.What triggers environmental management and innovation?Empirical evidence for Germany.Ecological Economics,2008,66(1):153-160.
[63]Wagner M.Empirical influence of environmental management on innovation:Evidence from Europe.Ecological Economics,2008,66(2/3):392-402.
[64]Khanna M,Deltas G,Harrington D R.Adoption of pollution prevention techniques:the role of management systems and regulatory pressures.Environmental and Resource Economics,2009,44(1):85-106.
[65]Kammerer D.The effects of customer benefit and regulation on environmental product innovation:Empirical evidence from appliance manufacturers in Germany.Ecological Economics,2009,68(8/9):2285-2295.
[66]Demirel P,Kesidou E.Stimulating different types of eco-innovation in the UK:Government policies and firm motivations.Ecological Economics,2011,70(8),1546-1557.
[67]Popp D,Hafner T,Johnstone N.Environmental policy vs.public pressure:Innovation and diffusion of alternative bleaching technologies in the pulp industry.Research Policy,2011,40(9),1253-1268.
[68]Yang C H,Tseng Y H,Chen C P.Environmental regulations,induced R&D,and productivity:Evidence from Taiwan's manufacturing industries.Resource and Energy Economics,2012,34(4),514-532.
[69]De Marchi,V.Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation:Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms.Research Policy,2012,41(3),614-623.
[70]Kesidou,E.,& Demirel,P.On the drivers of eco-innovations:Empirical evidence from the UK.Research Policy,2012,41(5),862-870.
[71]Gollop,F(xiàn) M,Roberts M J.Environmental regulations and productivity growth:the case of fossil-fueled electric power generation.Journal of Political Economy,1983,91:654-74.
[72]Smith J B,Sims W A.The impact of pollution charges on productivity growth in Canadian brewing.The Rand Journal of Economics,1985,16(3):410-423.
[73]Gray W B.The cost of regulation:OSHA,EPA and the productivity slowdown.The American Economic Review,1987,77(5):998-1006.
[74]Barbera A J,McConnell V D.The Impact of environmental regulations on industry productivity:Direct and indirect effects.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1990,18:50-65.
[75]Dufour C,Lanoie P,Patry M.Regulation and Productivity.Journal of Productivity Analysis,1998,9:233-247.
[76]Nakamura M,Takahashi T,Vertinsky I.Why Japanese firms choose to certify:a study of managerial responses to environmental issues.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2001,42(1):23-52.
[77]Berman E,Bui L T M.Environmental regulation and productivity:Evidence from oil refineries.The Review of Economics and Statistics,2001,83(3):498-510.
[78]Sheppard M.The Effects of Environmental Innovation on Market Value[D].Waterloo,Canada:University of Waterloo,2007.
[79]Lanoie P,Lucchetti J,Johnstone N,Ambec S.Environmental policy,innovation and performance:New insights on the Porter Hypothesis.CIRANO Scientific Series,Sfeptember 2007 [2012-02-16].http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2007s-19.pdf.
[80]Lanoie P,Patry M,Lajeunesse R.Environmental regulation and productivity:Testing the Porter Hypothesis.Journal of Productivity Analysis,30(2):121-128.
[81]Rassier D G,Earnhart D.The Effect of clean water regulation on profitability:Testing the Porter Hypothesis.Land Economics,2010,86(2):329-344.
[82]Costantini,V.,& Mazzanti,M.On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness?The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports.Research Policy,2012,41(1),132-153.
參考文獻(xiàn):
[3]中國科學(xué)院可持續(xù)發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略研究組.2006中國可持續(xù)發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略報(bào)告.北京:科學(xué)出版社,2006.
[4]諸大建.綠色的創(chuàng)新.上海:同濟(jì)大學(xué)出版社,2008.
[5]董穎.企業(yè)生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的機(jī)理研究[D].浙江:浙江大學(xué),2011
[34]董穎,石磊,生態(tài)創(chuàng)新的內(nèi)涵、分類體系與研究進(jìn)展,生態(tài)學(xué)報(bào),2010:30(9):2465-2474.