The ‘Chinese Porter Hypothesis’, Environmental Judicature and Corporate Green Technology Innovation—Evidence from China
SSRN, ISSN: 1556-5068
2023
- 2Citations
- 161Usage
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Environmental regulation within the legal system plays a significant role in the Porter hypothesis. Using the establishment of an environmental court with Chinese characteristics, we construct the time-varying difference-in-differences model and use it to examines the rationality of the ‘Chinese Porter Hypothesis’. The main findings of this study are as follows: (1) as an effective form of environmental regulation, environmental courts significantly improve the level of green technology innovation amongst local enterprises, which demonstrates the Porter hypothesis positively in China; (2) the establishment of environmental courts can effectively enhance the quality of green technology innovation, and the effect is more significant amongst non-state enterprises and heavily polluting companies; (3) the establishment of environmental courts can influence the green technology innovation of enterprises through two possible channels, government and market, including the enhancement of environmental attention from government and green financial support from the market. Through the findings of this study, we are able to uncover the effects of environmental judicature on corporate green technology innovation and provide a practical foundation for the development of environmental judicature specialisation.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know