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...

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The working papers published in the Series constitute work in progress circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comments. Views expressed represent exclusively the authors' own opinions and do not necessarily refl ect those of the editors. Terms of use: Documents in Ruhr Economic Papers #156

Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek AbstractIt is frequently hypothesized that environmental management systems (EMSs) may improve a firm's environmental performance. Whether or not this hypothesis is true is as important from the perspective of environmental policy as questions relating to the relevant incentives for (1) a firm's voluntary adoption of an EMS and (2) its environmental innovation behavior. Based on ample empirical evidence for German manufacturing, this paper addresses these issues on the basis of a recursive bivariate probit model that explicitly takes into account that a facility's decision on innovation activities is correlated with the decision on EMS certification. Our empirical results indicate that environmental innovation activities are not associated with EMS certification nor any other single policy instrument. Rather, innovation behavior seems to be correlated to the stringency of environmental policy.JEL Classification: O33, O38, Q28

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...