No abstract

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp11027.pdf Non technical summaryIn recent years, several studies have identified determinants of environmental innovations. In most econometric studies, environmental innovations in general were analyzed, some distinguish between end-of-pipe-innovations and cleaner production. Due to the lack of specific data, the existing literature on the driving forces of environmental innovations neglected the analysis of different environmental innovation types such as recycling, low carbon technologies or water management.The Community Innovation Panel (CIS) 2009 included, for the first time, a special module on eco-innovation differentiating between these specific types of environmental innovations. Analysing the German part of the CIS 2009, the main purpose of our paper is to test whether different types of environmental innovations (according to their environmental impacts) are triggered by different factors.Within our analysis, we define environmental innovations as product, process, marketing and organizational innovations leading to a noticeable reduction of environmental burdens. Positive environmental effects can be explicit goals or side-effects of innovations.In the literature, the important role of regulation and cost savings as motivations triggering eco-innovations is accentuated. In fact, a complex set of supply factors such as the endowment and availability of technological resources, company specific factors, organizational innovations, competition conditions or consumer demand have to be included in the analysis. Our empirical analysis shows that the innovation activities with high or medium environmental impacts concentrate on the reduction of energy use, CO 2 emissions and recycling whereas "older" areas such as the reduction of SO 2 or NO x emissions or water pollution that are not in the focus of present political discussions are under-represented.Except material and energy saving process innovations, regulations seem to be important for all other environmental impact areas. Especially for typically end-of-pipe oriented areas such as other air emissions (SO 2 or NO x ) the influence of present and future regulations is higher than for other areas. For innovations to reduce energy use cost-savings are the main motivation. Environmental Management Systems (EMS) seem to be especially important tools to trigger these cost-saving cleaner technologies because they help to...

No abstract

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp11027.pdf Non technical summaryIn recent years, several studies have identified determinants of environmental innovations. In most econometric studies, environmental innovations in general were analyzed, some distinguish between end-of-pipe-innovations and cleaner production. Due to the lack of specific data, the existing literature on the driving forces of environmental innovations neglected the analysis of different environmental innovation types such as recycling, low carbon technologies or water management.The Community Innovation Panel (CIS) 2009 included, for the first time, a special module on eco-innovation differentiating between these specific types of environmental innovations. Analysing the German part of the CIS 2009, the main purpose of our paper is to test whether different types of environmental innovations (according to their environmental impacts) are triggered by different factors.Within our analysis, we define environmental innovations as product, process, marketing and organizational innovations leading to a noticeable reduction of environmental burdens. Positive environmental effects can be explicit goals or side-effects of innovations.In the literature, the important role of regulation and cost savings as motivations triggering eco-innovations is accentuated. In fact, a complex set of supply factors such as the endowment and availability of technological resources, company specific factors, organizational innovations, competition conditions or consumer demand have to be included in the analysis. Our empirical analysis shows that the innovation activities with high or medium environmental impacts concentrate on the reduction of energy use, CO 2 emissions and recycling whereas "older" areas such as the reduction of SO 2 or NO x emissions or water pollution that are not in the focus of present political discussions are under-represented.Except material and energy saving process innovations, regulations seem to be important for all other environmental impact areas. Especially for typically end-of-pipe oriented areas such as other air emissions (SO 2 or NO x ) the influence of present and future regulations is higher than for other areas. For innovations to reduce energy use cost-savings are the main motivation. Environmental Management Systems (EMS) seem to be especially important tools to trigger these cost-saving cleaner technologies because they help to...

Die Discussion Papers dienen einer möglichst schnellen Verbreitung von neueren Forschungsarbeiten des ZEW. Die Beiträge liegen in alleiniger Verantwortung der Autoren und stellen nicht notwendigerweise die Meinung des ZEW dar.Discussion Papers are intended to make results of ZEW research promptly available to other economists in order to encourage discussion and suggestions for revisions. The authors are solely responsible for the contents which do not necessarily represent the opinion of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp0482.pdf I Non-technical SummaryTypically, we distinguish between two different types of environmental innovations that mitigate the environmental burden of production: cleaner production and end-of-pipe technologies. Cleaner production reduces resource use and/or pollution at the source by using cleaner products and production methods, whereas end-of-pipe technologies curb pollution emissions by implementing add-on measures. Thus, cleaner products and production technologies are frequently seen as being superior to end-of-pipe technologies for both environmental and economic reasons.The establishment of cleaner production technologies, however, is often hampered by barriers such as additional co-ordination input and a lack of organizational support within firms. In addition to substantial investment costs in new technologies, additional obstacles arise due to the nature of the environmental problem and the type of regulations involved.Command and Control (CaC) regulations, for instance, frequently impose technology standards that can only be met through end-of-pipe abatement measures. With particular respect to the diffusion of cleaner production and products, the question arises which one of several alternative policy approaches is to be preferred: performance standards, voluntary measures, or economic instruments which leave decisions about the appropriate abatement technology up to the firm?This paper analyzes factors that may enhance a firm's propensity to implement cleaner products and production technologies rather than end-of-pipe technologies. It is a widespread assumption that end-of-pipe technologies still dominate investment decisions in firms. This is because there has been exceptionally little empirical analysis directed to the determinants of the use of specific types of abatement measures -principally because of the paucity of available data. On the basis of a unique facility-level data set based on a recent survey covering seven OECD countries (Canada, France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Norway, and the U.S.)we find a clear dominance of cleaner production in these countries: Surprisingly, 76.8% of our sample facilities report that they predominantly invest in cleaner production technologies.There are, however, significant differences: Most notably, Germany displays the lowest percentage of cleaner production technologies among these OECD countries (57.5 %), while Japan exhibits the highest respective share (86.5 %). T...