Page 113 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 113
Hypotheses Development 113
trigger innovations, which lower the total cost of a product or improve its
value. Several researchers (Horbach 2008; Qi et al. 2010; Zeng et al. 2011;
Holtbrügge and Dögl 2012; Yabar et al. 2013; Chassagnon and Haned
2014) found that environmental regulation provides sufficient incentives
to induce eco-innovation. However, the regulations’ impact on eco-inno-
vation is not always straightforward. For instance, Frondel et al. (2008)
found that policy stringency has a positive effect on environmental in-
novation and abatement activities, while is not related to EMS adoption,
while Eiadat et al. (2008) found a significant negative effect of environ-
mental regulation on eco-innovation.
Another important issue pertains to the stream of research that fo-
cuses on the influences of different environmental policies – the com-
mand-and-control instrument vs. the economic incentive instrument –
on eco-innovation practices. The basic lesson from ecological economics
for a long time was that the economic incentive instrument is far more ef-
fective in triggering eco-innovation and is therefore superior to the com-
mand-and-control instrument (Cleff and Rennings 1999; Rennings et al.
2006). In contrast, Kemp and Pontoglio’s (2011) synthesized findings in-
dicated that the economic incentive instrument influence is far weaker
than assumed. Furthermore, empirical evidence of a study undertaken by
Li (2014) indicates that the command-and-control instrument works as a
driver of eco-innovation, while the economic incentive instrument does
not work. Oltra and Saint Jean (2009) argued that market-based instru-
ments cannot be complete substitutes for the other policy instruments
and by themselves are not sufficient for inducing environmental innova-
tion; the most effective seems to be combination of both environmental
and innovative policy. Brouillat and Oltra (2012) argued that the use and
impact of each instrument depends on the policy design – in particular,
on the level of stringency and on the reward system – that is implement-
ed. Therefore, similar to Li (2014), we investigate the individual effects
of the command-and-control instrument and the economic incentive in-
strument on eco-innovation practices. Therefore, we propose that:
Hypothesis 1a: There is a positive and significant relationship
between the command-and-control instrument and companies’
implementation of eco-innovation.
Hypothesis 1b: There is a positive and significant relationship
between the economic incentive instrument and companies’ im-
plementation of eco-innovation.
trigger innovations, which lower the total cost of a product or improve its
value. Several researchers (Horbach 2008; Qi et al. 2010; Zeng et al. 2011;
Holtbrügge and Dögl 2012; Yabar et al. 2013; Chassagnon and Haned
2014) found that environmental regulation provides sufficient incentives
to induce eco-innovation. However, the regulations’ impact on eco-inno-
vation is not always straightforward. For instance, Frondel et al. (2008)
found that policy stringency has a positive effect on environmental in-
novation and abatement activities, while is not related to EMS adoption,
while Eiadat et al. (2008) found a significant negative effect of environ-
mental regulation on eco-innovation.
Another important issue pertains to the stream of research that fo-
cuses on the influences of different environmental policies – the com-
mand-and-control instrument vs. the economic incentive instrument –
on eco-innovation practices. The basic lesson from ecological economics
for a long time was that the economic incentive instrument is far more ef-
fective in triggering eco-innovation and is therefore superior to the com-
mand-and-control instrument (Cleff and Rennings 1999; Rennings et al.
2006). In contrast, Kemp and Pontoglio’s (2011) synthesized findings in-
dicated that the economic incentive instrument influence is far weaker
than assumed. Furthermore, empirical evidence of a study undertaken by
Li (2014) indicates that the command-and-control instrument works as a
driver of eco-innovation, while the economic incentive instrument does
not work. Oltra and Saint Jean (2009) argued that market-based instru-
ments cannot be complete substitutes for the other policy instruments
and by themselves are not sufficient for inducing environmental innova-
tion; the most effective seems to be combination of both environmental
and innovative policy. Brouillat and Oltra (2012) argued that the use and
impact of each instrument depends on the policy design – in particular,
on the level of stringency and on the reward system – that is implement-
ed. Therefore, similar to Li (2014), we investigate the individual effects
of the command-and-control instrument and the economic incentive in-
strument on eco-innovation practices. Therefore, we propose that:
Hypothesis 1a: There is a positive and significant relationship
between the command-and-control instrument and companies’
implementation of eco-innovation.
Hypothesis 1b: There is a positive and significant relationship
between the economic incentive instrument and companies’ im-
plementation of eco-innovation.
