Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 85–106 | Cite as

Adoption of Pollution Prevention Techniques: The Role of Management Systems and Regulatory Pressures

  • Madhu Khanna
  • George Deltas
  • Donna Ramirez Harrington


This paper investigates the extent to which firm level technological change that reduces unregulated emissions is driven by regulatory pressures, and firms’ technological and organizational capabilities. Using a treatment effects model with panel data for a sample of S&P 500 firms over the period 1994–1996, we find that organizational change in the form of Total Quality Environmental Management leads firms to adopt pollution prevention practices, after controlling for the effects of various regulatory pressures and firm-specific characteristics. We find that the threat of anticipated regulations and the presence of ‘complementary assets’ is important for creating the incentives and an internal capacity to undertake incremental adoption of pollution prevention techniques.


Environmental management Toxic releases Total Quality Management 

JEL Classification

O32 O38 Q2 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amacher GS, Koskela E, Ollikainen M (2004) Environmental quality competition and eco-labeling. J Environ Econ Manage 47(2): 284–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson S, Daniel J, Johnson M (1999) Why firms seek ISO certification: regulatory compliance or competitive advantage? Prod Manage 8(1): 28–43Google Scholar
  3. Anton W, Deltas G, Khanna M (2004) Environmental management systems: do they improve environmental performance? J Environ Econ Manage 48(1): 632–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arimura T, Akira Hibiki H, Johnstone N (2007) An empirical study of environmental R&D: what encourages facilities to be environmentally innovative? In: Johnstone N (ed) Environmental policy and corporate behaviour. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp 142–173Google Scholar
  5. Arimura T, Hibikid HA, Katayama H (2008) Is a voluntary approach an effective environmental policy instrument? A case for environmental management systems. J Environ Econ Manage 55: 281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arora S, Cason T (1999) Do community characteristics influence environmental outcomes? Evidence from the toxics release inventory. South Econ J 65(4): 691–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arora S, Gangopadhyay S (1995) Towards a theoretical model of voluntary overcompliance. J Econ Behav Organ 28: 289–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barla P (2007) ISO 14001 certification and environmental performance in Quebec’s pulp and paper industry. J Environ Econ Manage 53: 291–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baron DP, Diermeir D (2007) Strategic activism and nonmarket strategy. J Econ Manage Strategy 16(3): 599–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barrett S (1992) Strategy and the environment. Colombia J World Bus 27: 202–209Google Scholar
  11. Blundell R, Griffith R, van Reenen J (1995) Dynamic count data models of technological innovation. Econ J 105: 333–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Breeden K, Fontaine M, Kuryk B (1994) Integrating product quality and environmental performance through innovation—the L’Oreal case. Total Qual Environ Manage Spring:309–317Google Scholar
  13. Brunnermeir SW, Cohen M (2003) Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries. J Environ Econ Manage 45(2): 278–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Canon de Francia J, Garces-Ayerbe C, Ramirez-Aleson M (2007) Are more innovative firms less vulnerable to new environmental regulation? Environ Resour Econ 36: 295–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Christmann P (2000) Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: the role of complementary assets. Acad Manage J 43(4): 663–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chynoweth E, Kirschner E (1993) Environmental standards provide a competitive advantage. Chem Week 16: 46–52Google Scholar
  17. Cleff T, Rennings K (1999) Determinants of environmental product and process innovation. Eur Environ 9(5): 191–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cohen WM, Levin RC (1989) Empirical studies of innovation and market structure, handbook of industrial organization. In: Schmalensee R, Willig R (eds) Handbook of industrial organization, 1st edn, vol 2, Chap 18. Elsevier, pp 1059–1107Google Scholar
  19. Cohen W, Levinthal D (1989) Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D. Econ J 99: 569–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cohen W, Levinthal D (1994) Fortune favors the prepared firm. Manage Sci 40(2): 227–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen W, Finn SA, Naimon JS (1995) Environmental and financial performance: are they related? Investor Research and Responsibility Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Cothran MC (1993) Proactive environmental activity eases permitting process. J Environ Plan Summer: 293–300Google Scholar
  23. Cremer H, Thisse JF (1999) On the taxation of polluting products in a differentiated industry. Eur Econ Rev 43(3): 575–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Crow M (2000) Beyond experiments. Environ Forum, May/June:19–29Google Scholar
  25. Dahlstrom K, Howes C, Leinster O, Skea J (2003) Environmental management systems and company performance: assessing the case for extending risk-based regulation. Eur Environ 13: 187–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dasgupta S, Hettige H, Wheeler D (2000) What improves environmental compliance? Evidence from Mexican industry. J Environ Econ Manage 39(1): 39–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dean TJ, Brown R (1995) Pollution regulation as a barrier to new firm entry: initial evidence and implications for future research. Acad Manage J 38: 288–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. DeCanio SJ, Dribble C, Amir-Atefi K (2000) The importance of organizational structure for the adoption of innovations. Manage Sci 46(10): 1285–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Decker CS (2003) Corporate environmentalism and environmental statutory permitting. J Law Econ 46(1): 103–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Deltas G, Harrington DR, Khanna M (2008) Markets with (somewhat) environmentally conscious consumers, Working Paper. Department of Economics, University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  31. Dierickx IK, Cool K (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage: comment; reply. Manage Sci 35(12): 1504–1514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Donnenfeld S, White L (1988) Product variety and the inefficiency of monopoly. Economica 55(219): 393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dosi G (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technological change. Res Policy 11(3): 147–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Downing PB, White LJ (1986) Innovation in pollution control. J Environ Econ Manage 8: 225–271Google Scholar
  35. Florida R (1996) Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. Calif Manage Rev 39(1): 80–105Google Scholar
  36. Florida R, Davison D (2001) Why do firms adopt advanced environmental practices (and do they make a difference). In: Coglianese C, Nash J (eds) Regulating from the inside: can environmental management systems achieve policy goals? Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, pp 82–104Google Scholar
  37. Florida R, Jenkins PD (1996) Adoption of organizational innovations by Japanese transplants. Heinz School Working Paper, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg, PA AugustGoogle Scholar
  38. Frondel M, Horbach J, Rennings K (2007) End-of-pipe or cleaner production? An empirical comparison of environmental innovation decisions across OECD countries. In: Johnstone N (ed) Environmental policy and corporate behaviour. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp 174–212Google Scholar
  39. Gray W, Shadbegian R (1995) Pollution abatement costs, regulation, and plant-level productivity. NBER Working Papers: 4994Google Scholar
  40. Gray W, Shadbegian R (1998) Environmental regulation, investment timing, and technology choice. J Indus Econ 46(2): 235–256Google Scholar
  41. Griliches Z (1957) Hybrid corn: an exploration in the economics of technological change. Econometrica 25: 501–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hamilton JT (1999) Exercising property rights to pollute: do cancer risks and politics affect plant emission reductions. J Risk Uncertain 18(2): 105–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Harrington DR, Khanna M, Deltas G (2008) Striving to be green: the adoption of total quality environmental management result. Appl Econ 40(23): 2995–3007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hemphil TA (1993/1994) Corporate environmentalism and self-regulation: keeping enforcement agencies at bay. J Environ Regul, Winter. 145–154Google Scholar
  45. Henriques I, Sadorsky P (1996) The determinants of an environmentally responsive firms: an empirical approach. J Environ Econ Manage 30: 381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Howard J, Nash J, Ehrenfeld J (2000) Standard or smokescreen? Implementation of voluntary environmental code. Calif Manage Rev 42(2): 63–82Google Scholar
  47. Innes R, Sam AG (2008) Voluntary pollution reductions and the enforcement of environmental law: an empirical study of the 33/50 program. J Law Econ 51(2): 271–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jaffe AB, Palmer K (1997) Environmental regulation and innovation: a panel data study. Rev Econ Stat 79: 610–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Karamanos P (2000) Voluntary environmental agreements for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: incentives and characteristics of electric utility participants in the climate challenge program. Working Paper, Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke UniversityGoogle Scholar
  50. Khanna M (2001) Nonmandatory approaches to environmental regulation: a survey. J Econ Surv 15(3): 291–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Khanna M, Anton W (2002) Corporate environmental management: regulatory and market-based pressures. Land Econ 78: 539–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Khanna M, Brouhle K (forthcoming) Effectiveness of voluntary environmental initiatives. In: Delmas M, Young O (eds) Governing the environment: interdisciplinary perspectives, Chap 6. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  53. Khanna M, Damon L (1999) EPA’s voluntary 33/50 program: impact on toxic releases and economic performance of firms. J Environ Econ Manage 37(1): 125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. King AA, Lenox MJ (2000) Industry self-regulation without sanctions: the chemical industry’s responsible care program. Acad Manage J 43(4): 698–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. King AA, Lenox MJ (2001) Who adopts management standards early? An examination of ISO 14001 certifications? Acad Manage Proc :A1–A6Google Scholar
  56. Lanjuow JO, Mody A (1996) Innovation and the international diffusion of environmentally-responsive technology. Res Policy 25: 549–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. List J (2001) US county-level determinants of inbound FDI: evidence from two-step count data model. Int J Indus Organ 19: 953–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lutz S, Lyon TP, Maxwell JW (2000) Quality leadership when regulatory standards are forthcoming. J Indus Econ 48(3): 331–348Google Scholar
  59. Maxwell WJ, Decker C (2006) Voluntary environmental investment and responsive regulation. Environ Resour Econ 33: 425–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Maxwell WJ, Lyon T, Hackett S (2000) Self-regulation and social welfare: the political economy of corporate environmentalism. J Law Econ 43(2): 583–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McGee NC, Bhushan AK (1993) Applying the baldridge quality criteria to environmental performance: lessons from leading organizations. Total Qual Environ Manage Autumn 2(1): 1–18Google Scholar
  62. Milliman SR, Prince R (1989) Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control. J Environ Econ Manage 17: 247–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nakamura M, Takahashi R, Vertinsky I (2001) Why Japanese firms choose to certify: a study of managerial responses to environmental issues. J Environ Econ Manage 42: 23–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nash J, Nutt K, Maxwell J, Ehrenfeld J (1992) Polaroid’s environmental accounting and reporting system: benefits and limitations of a TQEM assessment tool. Total Qual Environ Manage Autumn:3–15Google Scholar
  65. Pickman HA (1998) The effect of environmental regulation on environmental innovation. Bus Strategy Environ 7(4): 223–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ploch DJ, Wlodarczyk J (2000) Naugatuck glass: an update on environmental sucesses with the system’s approch. Environ Qual Manage Autumn:75–78Google Scholar
  67. Porter ME, van der Linde C (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment competitiveness relationship. J Econ Perspect 9(4): 97–118Google Scholar
  68. Potoski M, Prakash A (2005) Covenants with weak swords: ISO14001 and facilities’ environmental performance. J Policy Anal Manage 24: 745–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Prais SJ, Winsten C (1954) Trend estimators and serial correlation. Cowles Commission Discussion Paper, No 383. ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  70. President’s Commission on Environmental Quality (1993) Total quality management: a framework for pollution prevention. Quality Environmental Management Subcommittee. Washington DC, JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  71. Rondinelli DA, Berry M (2000) Corporate environmental management and public policy: bridging the gap. Am Behav Sci 44(2): 168–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schmookler J (1962) Determinants of industrial invention. In: Nelson RR The rate of direction of inventive activity: economic and social factors. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  73. Segerson K, Miceli TJ (1998) Voluntary environmental agreements: good or bad news for environmental protection? J Environ Econ Manage 36(2): 109–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Shaw BM, Epstein LD (2000) What bandwagons bring: effects of popular management techniques on corporate performance, reputation and CEO pay. Adm Sci Q 45(3): 523–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Spence M (1975) Monopoly, quality and regulation. Bell J Econ 6: 127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Teece D, Pisano G (1994) The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Indus Change 3: 537–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manage J 18(7): 509–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tietenborg T (2006) Environmental and natural resource economics, 7th edn. Pearson, BostonGoogle Scholar
  79. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1997) Pollution prevention 1997: a national progress report. EPA/742/R–97/00, JuneGoogle Scholar
  80. US Environmental Protection Agency (1998) Environmental management systems primer for federal facilities, DOE/EH–0573. Prepared by: office of environmental policy & assistance, US Department of Energy, and Federal Facilities Enforcement Office. Available at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/incentives/ems/emsprimer.pdf
  81. US General Accounting Office (1994) Toxic substances: EPA needs more reliable source reduction data and progress measures. GAO/RCED-94-93Google Scholar
  82. Videras J, Alberini A (2000) The appeal of voluntary environmental programs: which firms participate and why? Contemp Econ Policy 18(4): 449–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Welch EW, Mazur A, Bretschneider S (1999) Voluntary behavior by electric utilities: levels of adoption and contribution of the climate challenge program to the reduction of carbon dioxide. J Policy Anal Manage 19(3): 407–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wever GH, Vorhauer GF (1993) Kodak’s framework and assessment tool for implementing TQEM. Total Qual Environ Manage August:19–30Google Scholar
  85. Wikle TA (1995) Geographical patterns of membership in US environmental organizations. Prof Geogr 47(1): 41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wlodarczyk J, Pojasek RB, Moore D, Waldrip G (2000) Using a system’s approach to improve process and environmental performance. Environ Qual Manage Summer:53–62Google Scholar
  87. Wooldridge J (2002) Econometric estimation of cross section and panel data. Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  88. Ziegler A, Rennings K (2004) Determinants of environmental innovations in Germany: do organizational measures matter? A discrete choice analysis at the firm level, ZEW Discussion Paper No 04-30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Madhu Khanna
    • 1
  • George Deltas
    • 2
  • Donna Ramirez Harrington
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural and Consumer EconomicsUniversity of IllinoisUrbanaUSA
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of IllinoisChampaignUSA
  3. 3.Department EconomicsUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations