【摘要】 运用参数化的二次型方向性距离函数表示包含能源消耗和碳排放的环境生产技术,估计了中国1986-2010年间30个地区环境全要素生产率并将其分解为环境效率改进、环境管制引致型环境技术创新和自治性环境技术创新三个部分。进一步地,考察了环境技术创新的偏向性。结果发现,样本期间中国环境全要素生产率年均增长0.92%。环境全要素生产率增长主要源于环境技术创新,而非环境效率改进。然而,与年均0.65%的自治性环境技术创新相比,环境管制引致的环境技术创新仅占整体环境技术创新的16%。环境技术创新,包括环境管制引致的环境技术创新和自治性环境技术创新,对要素投入和产出的影响是非中性的。本文的发现支持了环境管制引致环境技术创新的波特假说,但是由于环境管制对环境技术创新的引致作用并不强烈且存在偏向性,环境管制的创新补偿效应能否弥补环境管制的遵循成本依赖更为合理的环境管制措施和提升环境政策与科技创新政策的整合性。更多还原

【Abstract】 In this paper, we use parameterized directional distance function in quadratic form as a representation of environmental production technology that includes energy consumption and carbon dioxide. We measure environmental total factor productivity change（PC） for 30 regions in China from 1986 to 2010 with the directional distance function. PC is decomposed into environmental efficiency change（EC） and environmental technological innovation（TI）. TI is further decomposed into environmental regulation-induced and autonomous technological innovation（ITI and ATI）. We also investigate output（GDP and carbon dioxide） and input（labor, capital and energy consumption） bias arising from TI, ITI and ATI. The purpose of the study is to test the Porter hypothesis that suggests environmental regulation inhibit environmental technological innovation, and examine the impact of TI on output and input structure. The obtained results suggest that China’s annual average of PC has increased by about 0.92% during the study period, and the main source of PC is TI instead of EC. However, compared to the approximate 0.65% per year of ATI, ITI is relatively small, and the contribution of the induced effect to overall environmental technological innovation is about 16%. TI, either environmental regulation-induced and autonomous, has a non-neutral impact on outputs and inputs. The output bias results indicate that ITI reduces GDP, but increases CO₂ emissions. ATI increases GDP, but reduces CO₂ emissions. The overall environmental technological innovation reduces CO₂. The input bias results show that ITI uses capital, but can save labor and energy cost. ATI uses labor and energy cost, but save capital investment. The overall environmental technological innovation can save labor and capital cost, but use energy. PC, as well as the size and bias of TI, vary with periods and regions. Our findings favor the Porter Hypothesis that suggests environmental regulation inhibit environmental technological innovation. The induced effect is small and biased. However, whether it can compensate compliance cost arising from environmental regulation depends on well-designed environmental regulations, which can promote conformability between environmental and technological innovation policy.更多还原