Optimal green technology investment and emission reduction in emissions generating companies under the support of green bond and subsidy

It is commonly argued in what is termed the degrowth strategy that economic growth cannot occur side by side with environmental protection. In this study, it is instead argued that the spread of green products through economic complexity and international trade are possible means of solving this problem. To this end, the individual and interactive environmental impacts of economic complexity and international green trade are examined in a panel of 24 European Union nations between 2000 and 2018. Panel quantile regressions (QRs) and Driscoll-Kraay fixed effect-OLS

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The synergistic effect of green trade and economic complexity on sustainable environment: A new perspective on the economic and ecological components of sustainable development

Olasehinde‐Williams

Gyamfi

2022

“…This raises worries about the long‐term impacts because it does not provide symmetric advantages within countries. Experts demand the adoption of clean technology that benefits humans, hence the push for green technology (Hussain et al, 2022; Lee et al, 2022; Wang & Ren, 2022).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable Development Goals in BRICS and G7 countries: Increasing accomplishments through policy synergies in four dimensions

Ofori

Appiah‐Opoku

2023

The United Nation's 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent aspirations for human development that necessitate the epiphany of a universal yet varied set of ethical values, social equity, sustainability, and healthy lifestyle within a clean, safe environment. However, recent events such as Covid‐19 and the Ukraine–Russia Impasse have been a bane to achieving these goals. Consequently, there is the need to find innovative ways to increase accomplishments. Given that the SDGs are inherently interconnected and that achieving one is a suitable springboard for achieving others, we hypothesize the whole SDGs in four dimensions: (i) environmental, (ii) economic, (iii) human development, and (iv) energy sustainability to aid in cost effective implementation and comparative analysis between BRICS and G7 countries. Proxying SDGs 3 and 4 with human development, SDG 8 with economic growth, SDG 13 with environmental sustainability, and SDG 7 with energy sustainability, we use panel data from 2000 to 2020. We conducted a thorough empirical investigation and used sophisticated econometric approaches—Driscoll–Kraay for the principal analysis and fixed effect for robustness check. From the analysis, we conclude that the policy frame of UN‐SDG is inconsistent within the panel (BRICS and G7 nations), suggesting that these policy instruments need a uniform harmonization in the policy framework. In conclusion, a policy framework must be created in such a manner that, while having the ability to improve the environment, the pattern of economic growth is preserved, and human progress pursues its goals with priority access to sustainable energy.

“…Most scholars agree that market‐based regulatory instruments are more flexible, leaving more space for enterprises to find technical solutions, which helps to reduce costs and play a compensatory role for innovation, thereby increasing their willingness to conduct the practice of green technology innovation. In this context, large numbers of studies have discussed the incentive effect of environmental regulatory instruments such as carbon emissions trading policy (Liu & Li, 2022), administrative regulations on levy and use of pollution discharge fee (Cheng & Kong, 2022), the reform of environmental protection fee‐to‐tax (Liu et al, 2022), increased emission taxes (Feichtinger et al, 2005), and government subsidies to reduce emissions (Hussain et al, 2022).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic or substantive innovation? The effect of government environmental punishment on enterprise green technology innovation

Guo

et al. 2023

Under the conduction of decentralized environmental governance, environmental punishment has become a pivotal complementary tool for local government environment management and an intuitive reflection of governance efficiency. However, the literature concerning the effect of local government environmental punishment towards the green technology innovation of enterprises is void. To bridge this gap, this paper adopts the fixed‐effect model to investigate the impact of government environmental punishment on green technology innovation based on the data of China's A‐share listed enterprises from 2010 to 2020. The study finds that the punishment can significantly promote enterprises' green technology innovation. The distinction between the type of innovation reveals that environmental punishment promotes substantive green technology innovation of enterprises, while the effect on strategic green technology innovation is not significant. As far as the influence path is concerned, external pressure and internal incentive are both important mechanisms for environmental punishment to facilitate the green technology innovation of enterprises. Heterogeneity analysis demonstrates that the positive effect of punishment on green technology innovation is more prominent in non‐state‐owned enterprises, heavily polluting industries and regions with strong public awareness of environmental protection. Further discussion reveals that the facilitative effect of punishment on green technology innovation also significantly improves the environmental performance of enterprises. This paper not only confirms the positive role of government intervention in environmental protection, but also provides practical reference for how to improve enterprises' competitiveness.