THE SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION ON THE APPLICATION OF PORTER'S HYPOTHESIS BETWEEN THE YEARS 2000 TO 2015
Article Sidebar
Published:
Dec 1, 2017
Keywords:
Porter Hypothesis, Sustainability, Innovation, Environmental Regulation
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aims to analyze the application of Porter's Hypothesis and its relevance in business innovation due to environmental laws evidenced in articles available in Ebsco Basis between the years 2000 to 2015. The research is characterized as exploratory bibliographical, by providing researchers with greater contact with the subject researched. For this purpose was developed a search on Ebsco from August to November of 2015 and later analyzed 82 articles from different institutions and countries. It was found that despite being highly criticized the hypothesis can reach your goal in the most diverse sectors, however most research focuses on the industrial sector.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
How to Cite
FUJIHARA, Hillary Lapas; SILVA, Elizandra da; BERTOLINI, Geysler Rogis Flor. THE SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION ON THE APPLICATION OF PORTER’S HYPOTHESIS BETWEEN THE YEARS 2000 TO 2015. Revista de Direito Brasileira, Florianopolis, Brasil, v. 18, n. 7, p. 282–300, 2017. DOI: 10.26668/IndexLawJournals/2358-1352/2017.v18i7.3205. Disponível em: https://indexlaw.org/index.php/rdb/article/view/3205. Acesso em: 20 dec. 2024.
Issue
Section
PARTE GERAL
O(s) autor(es) autoriza(m) a publicação do artigo na revista;
• O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
• A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
• É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigo às normas da publicação.
• O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
• A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
• É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigo às normas da publicação.
Autores mantêm os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Attribution que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado (Veja O Efeito do Acesso Livre) emhttp://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
References
ALPAY, E.; BUCCOLA, S.; KERKVLIET, J. Productivity growth and environmental regulation in Mexican and U.S. food manufacturing. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, v. 84, n.4, 887-901, 2002.
AMBEC, S.; BARLA, P. A theoretical foundation of the Porter hypothesis. Economics Letters, n. 75, p. 355-360, 2002.
AMBEC, S.; COHEN, M. A.; ELGIE, S.; LANOIE, P. The Porter Hypothesis at 20: con environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Environmental Economics and Policy. v. 7 n. 1 p. 2-22, jan., 2013.
ANDRÉ, F. J.; GONZÁLEZ P.; PORTEIRO, N. Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 57, p. 182-194, 2009.
ANSANELLI, S. L. de M. Exigências ambientais europeias: novos desafios competitivos para o complexo eletrônico brasileiro. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, v. 10, n. 1, jan./jun., 2011.
ANTONIOLI, D.; MANCINELLI, S.; MAZZANTI, M. Is environmental innovation embedded within high-performance organizational changes? The role of human resource management and complementarity in green business strategies. Research Policy, v. 42, p. 975-988, 2013.
AQUINO, S. R. F. de; CAVALHEIRO, L. P. R.; PELLENZ, M. A tutela jurídica da água no Brasil: reflexões a partir dos direitos da natureza. Revista de Direito Brasileira – RDB, São Paulo, v. 14, n. 6, p. 65-79, maio/ago., 2016.
ASHFORD, N. A. Na innovation-based strategy for a sustainable environment. In: J. Hemmelskamp, K. Rennings, F. Leone (org.). Innovation-oriented environmental regulation: theoretical approach and empirical analysis. New York: ZEW Economic Studies, 2000, p. 67-107.
BATES, T.; ROBB, A. Analysis of young neighnorhood firms serving urban minority clients. Journal of Economics and Business, v. 60, p. 139-148, 2008.
BERNARD, S. Remanufacturing. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 62, n. 3, p. 337-351, 2011.
BRÄNNLUND, R.; LUNDGREN, T. Environmental policy and profitability: evidence from Swedish industry. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, v. 12, p. 59-79, 2010.
BROBERG, T.; MARKLUND, Per-Olov; SAMAKOVLIS, E.; HAMMAR, H. Testing the Porter hypothesis: the effects of environmental investments on efficiency in Swedish industry. Journal of Productivity Analysis, v. 40, p. 43-56, jan., 2013.
BURNETT, R. D.; HANSEN, D. R.; QUINTANA, O. Eco-efficiency: achieving productivity improvements through environmental cost management. Accounting and the Public Interest, v. 7, n. 1, p. 66-92, 2007.
CALIENDO, P.; MUNIZ, V. Política fiscal e desenvolvimento tecnológico-empresarial: uma análise crítica sobre inovação e tributação. Revista de Direito Brasileira – RDB, São Paulo, v.12, n. 5, p. 155-172, 2015.
CERIN, P. Bringing economic opportunity into line with environmental influence: a discussion on the Coase theorem and the Porter and van der Linde hypothesis. Ecological Economics, v. 56, p. 209-225, 2006.
COLLINS, J.; HUSSEY, R. Pesquisa em administração: um guia prático para alunos de graduação e pós-graduação. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2005.
CONNELLY, J.; LIMPAPHAYOM, P. Environmental reporting and firm performance: evidence from Thailand. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, v. 13, p. 137-149, 2004.
COSTANTINI, V.; CRESPI, F. Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies. Ecological Economics, v. 68, p. 447-460, 2008.
COSTANTINI, V.; MAZZANTI, M. On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Research Policy, v. 41, n.1, p. 132-153, 2012.
DOGANAY, S. M.; SAYED, S.; TASKIN, F. Is environmental efficiency trade inducing or trade hindering? Energy Economics, v. 44, p. 340-349, 2014.
FEICHTINGER, G.; HARTL, R. F.; KORT, P. M.; VELIOV, V. M. Environmental policy, the Porter hypothesis and the composition of capital: effects of learning and technological progress. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 50, p. 434-446, 2005.
FORD, J. A.; STEEN, J.; VERREYNNE, M.-L. How environmental regulations affect innovation in the Australian oil and gas industry: going beyond the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 84, p. 204-2013, 2014.
FRANCKX, L. Regulatory emission limits for cars and the Porter Hypothesis: a survey of the literature. Transport Reviews, v. 35, n. 6, p. 746-766, 2015.
FROHWEIN, T.; HANSJÜRGENS, B. Chemicals regulation and the Porter hypothesis: a critical review of the new European chemicals regulation. Journal of Business Chemistry, v. 2, n. 1, p. 19-36, jan., 2005.
GILL, A. C. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008.
GREAKER, M. Spillovers in the development of new pollution abatement technology: a new look at the Porter-hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 52, p. 411-420, 2006.
GROBA, F. Determinants of trade with solar energy technology components: evidence on the Porter Hypothesis? Applied Economics, v. 46, n. 5, p. 503-526, 2014.
HAMAMOTO, M. Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries. Resource and Energy Economics, v. 28, p. 299-312, 2006.
HORBACH, J. Determinants of environmental innovation - new evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, v. 37, n.1, p. 163-173, 2008.
HORVÁTHOVÁ, E. The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: short-term costs and long-term benefits. Ecological Economics, v. 84, p. 91-97, 2012.
INOUE, E.; ARIMURA, T. H.; NAKANO, M. A new insight into environmental innovation: does the maturity of environmental management systems matter? Ecological Economics, v. 94, p. 156-163, 2013.
JAFFE, A.B.; PALMER, K. Environmental regulation and innovation: a panel data study. Economics and Statistics, v. 79, p. 610-619, 1997.
KATARIA, M. The role of preferences in disagreements over scientific hypothesis: evidence on cognitive bias in formation of beliefs. The Journal of Socio-Economics, v. 41, n. 4, p. 364-369, 2012.
KÓZLUK, T.; ZIPPERER, V. Environmental policies and productivity growth – a critical review of empirical findings. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, v. 88, p. 1-37, nov., 2013.
KRIECHEL, B.; ZIESEMER, T. The environmental Porter Hypothesis: theory, evidence and a model of timing of adoption. Economics of Innovation & New Technology, v. 18, n.3, p. 267-294, 2009.
LANOIE, P.; PATRY, M.; LAJEUNESSE, R. Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Poductivity Analysis, v. 30, p. 121-128, 2008.
LANOIE, P.; LAURENT-LUCCHETI, J.; JOHNSTONE, N.; AMBEC, S. Environmental policy, innovation and performance: new insights on the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, v. 20, n. 3, p. 803-842, 2011.
LIM, S.; PRAKASH, A. Voluntary regulations and innovation: the case of ISO 14001. Public Administration Review, v. 74, n. 2, p. 233-244, 2014.
LINDMARK, M.; BERGQUIST, A. K. Expansion for pollution reduction? Environmental adaptation of a Swedish and a Canadian metal smelter, 1960-2005. Business History, v. 50, n. 4, p. 530-546, 2008.
LIU, X.; DAI, H.; CHENG, P. Drivers of integrated environmental innovation and impact on company competitiveness: evidence from 18 Chinese firms. Journal of Technology and Globalisation, v. 5, n. 3/4, p. 255-280, 2011.
LÓPEZ-GAMERO, M. D.; CLAVER-CORTÉS, E.; MOLINA-AZORÍN, J. F. Evaluating environmental regulation in Spain using process control and preventive techniques. European Journal of Operational Research, v. 2 n. 1, p. 497-518, 2009.
LUNDGREN, T.; MARKLUND, P.-O. Climate policy, environmental performance, and profits. Journal of Productivity Analysis, v. 44, p. 225-235, 2015.
MAÇANEIRO, M. B.; CUNHA, S. K. da; KUHL, M. R.; CUNHA, J. C. da. A regulamentação ambiental conduzindo estratégias ecoinovativas na indústria de papel e celulose. Revista de Administração Contemporânea – RAC, v. 19, n. 1, p. 65-83, jan./fev., 2015.
MANAGI, S.; OPALUCH, J. J.; DI, J.; GRIGALUNAS, T. A. Environmental Regulations and Technological Change in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry. Land Economics, v. 81, n. 2, p. 303-319, 2005.
MOHR, R. D. Technical change, external economies, and the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, n. 43, p. 158-168, 2002.
MOHR, R. D.; SAHA, Shrawantee. Distribution of environmental costs and benefits, additional distortions, and the Porter hypothesis. Land Economics, v. 84, n. 4, p. 689-700, nov., 2008.
OBERNDORFER, U.; RENNINGS, K. Costs and competitiveness effects of the European Union emissions trading scheme. European Environment, v. 17, p. 1-17, 2007.
POPP, D. Uncertain R&D and the Porter hypothesis. Contributions to Economic Analysis & Policy, v. 4, n. 1, set., 2005.
PORTER, M. E. America’s Green Strategy. Scientific American, v. 264, n. 4, p. 96, april, 1991.
PORTER, M. E.; van der LINDE, C. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Jornal of Economic Perspectives, v. 9, n. 4, p. 97-118, 1995.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. The effect of clean water regulation on profitability: testing the Porter hypothesis. Land Economics, v. 96, n. 2, p. 329-344, may, 2010.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. Short-run and long-run implications of environmental regulation on financial performance. Contemporary Economic Policy, v. 29, n. 3, p. 357-373, 2011.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability. Ecological Economics, v. 112, p. 129-140, 2015.
RAZUMOVA, M.; IBÁÑEZ, J. L.;REY, J. Drivers of environmental innovation in Majorca hotels. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, v. 23, n. 10, p. 1529-1549, 2015.
RENNINGS, K.; RAMMER, C. The impact of regulation-driven environmental innovation on innovation sucess and firm performance. Zew -Centre for European Economic Research Discussion, n. 10-065, p. 1-34, 2010.
RUBASHKINA, Y.; GALEOTTI, M.; VERDOLINI, E.. Environmental regulation and competitiveness: empirical evidence on the Porter hypothesis from european manufacturing sectors. Energy Policy, v. 83, p. 288-300, 2015.
SADEGHZADEH, J. The impact of environmental policies on productivity and market competition. Environment and Development Economics, v. 19, n. 5, 2014.
SCHLUGA, T. R. Some micro-evidence on the “Porter hypothesis” from Austrian VOC emission standards. Growth and Change, v. 34, n. 3, p. 359-379, 2003.
SMITH, V. K.; AYERBE, C. Do Painless Environmental Policies Exist? Journal of Risk & Uncertainty, v. 73, p. 73-94, 2000.
STELLA, B.; AGGREY, N.; ESEZA, K. Firm size and rate of growth of Ugandan manufacturing firms. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, v. 4, n. 3, p. 178-188, 2014.
TACHIZAWA, T. Gestão ambiental e responsabilidade social corporativa: estratégias de negócios focadas na realidade brasileira. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2007.
TRIEBSWETTER, U.; WACKERBAUER, J. Integrated environmental product innovation and impacts on company competitiveness: a case study of the automotive industry in the region of Munich. European Environmental, v. 18, p. 30-44, 2008a.
TRIEBSWETTER, U.; WACKERBAUER, J. Integrated environmental product innovation in the region of Munich and its impact on company competitiveness. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 16, p. 1484-1493, 2008b.
VLIST, A. J. van der; WITHAGEN, C.; FOLMER, H. Technical efficiency under alternative environmental regulatory regimes: the case of Dutch horticulture. Ecological Economics, v. 63, n. 1, p. 165-173, 2007.
YANG , X.; YAO, Y. Environmental compliance and firm performance: evidence from China. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, v. 74, n. 3, p. 397-424, 2012.
YANG, C.-H.; TSENG, Y.-H.; CHEN, C.-P. Environmental regulations, induced R&D, and productivity: evidence from Taiwan’s manufacturing industries. Resource and Energy Economics, v. 34, p. 514-532, 2012.
ZIESERMER, T. A knowledge-based view of the Porter Hypothesis. Environmental Policy and Governance, v. 23, n. 3, p. 193-208, 2013.
AMBEC, S.; BARLA, P. A theoretical foundation of the Porter hypothesis. Economics Letters, n. 75, p. 355-360, 2002.
AMBEC, S.; COHEN, M. A.; ELGIE, S.; LANOIE, P. The Porter Hypothesis at 20: con environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Environmental Economics and Policy. v. 7 n. 1 p. 2-22, jan., 2013.
ANDRÉ, F. J.; GONZÁLEZ P.; PORTEIRO, N. Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 57, p. 182-194, 2009.
ANSANELLI, S. L. de M. Exigências ambientais europeias: novos desafios competitivos para o complexo eletrônico brasileiro. Revista Brasileira de Inovação, v. 10, n. 1, jan./jun., 2011.
ANTONIOLI, D.; MANCINELLI, S.; MAZZANTI, M. Is environmental innovation embedded within high-performance organizational changes? The role of human resource management and complementarity in green business strategies. Research Policy, v. 42, p. 975-988, 2013.
AQUINO, S. R. F. de; CAVALHEIRO, L. P. R.; PELLENZ, M. A tutela jurídica da água no Brasil: reflexões a partir dos direitos da natureza. Revista de Direito Brasileira – RDB, São Paulo, v. 14, n. 6, p. 65-79, maio/ago., 2016.
ASHFORD, N. A. Na innovation-based strategy for a sustainable environment. In: J. Hemmelskamp, K. Rennings, F. Leone (org.). Innovation-oriented environmental regulation: theoretical approach and empirical analysis. New York: ZEW Economic Studies, 2000, p. 67-107.
BATES, T.; ROBB, A. Analysis of young neighnorhood firms serving urban minority clients. Journal of Economics and Business, v. 60, p. 139-148, 2008.
BERNARD, S. Remanufacturing. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 62, n. 3, p. 337-351, 2011.
BRÄNNLUND, R.; LUNDGREN, T. Environmental policy and profitability: evidence from Swedish industry. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, v. 12, p. 59-79, 2010.
BROBERG, T.; MARKLUND, Per-Olov; SAMAKOVLIS, E.; HAMMAR, H. Testing the Porter hypothesis: the effects of environmental investments on efficiency in Swedish industry. Journal of Productivity Analysis, v. 40, p. 43-56, jan., 2013.
BURNETT, R. D.; HANSEN, D. R.; QUINTANA, O. Eco-efficiency: achieving productivity improvements through environmental cost management. Accounting and the Public Interest, v. 7, n. 1, p. 66-92, 2007.
CALIENDO, P.; MUNIZ, V. Política fiscal e desenvolvimento tecnológico-empresarial: uma análise crítica sobre inovação e tributação. Revista de Direito Brasileira – RDB, São Paulo, v.12, n. 5, p. 155-172, 2015.
CERIN, P. Bringing economic opportunity into line with environmental influence: a discussion on the Coase theorem and the Porter and van der Linde hypothesis. Ecological Economics, v. 56, p. 209-225, 2006.
COLLINS, J.; HUSSEY, R. Pesquisa em administração: um guia prático para alunos de graduação e pós-graduação. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2005.
CONNELLY, J.; LIMPAPHAYOM, P. Environmental reporting and firm performance: evidence from Thailand. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, v. 13, p. 137-149, 2004.
COSTANTINI, V.; CRESPI, F. Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies. Ecological Economics, v. 68, p. 447-460, 2008.
COSTANTINI, V.; MAZZANTI, M. On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Research Policy, v. 41, n.1, p. 132-153, 2012.
DOGANAY, S. M.; SAYED, S.; TASKIN, F. Is environmental efficiency trade inducing or trade hindering? Energy Economics, v. 44, p. 340-349, 2014.
FEICHTINGER, G.; HARTL, R. F.; KORT, P. M.; VELIOV, V. M. Environmental policy, the Porter hypothesis and the composition of capital: effects of learning and technological progress. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 50, p. 434-446, 2005.
FORD, J. A.; STEEN, J.; VERREYNNE, M.-L. How environmental regulations affect innovation in the Australian oil and gas industry: going beyond the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 84, p. 204-2013, 2014.
FRANCKX, L. Regulatory emission limits for cars and the Porter Hypothesis: a survey of the literature. Transport Reviews, v. 35, n. 6, p. 746-766, 2015.
FROHWEIN, T.; HANSJÜRGENS, B. Chemicals regulation and the Porter hypothesis: a critical review of the new European chemicals regulation. Journal of Business Chemistry, v. 2, n. 1, p. 19-36, jan., 2005.
GILL, A. C. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008.
GREAKER, M. Spillovers in the development of new pollution abatement technology: a new look at the Porter-hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, v. 52, p. 411-420, 2006.
GROBA, F. Determinants of trade with solar energy technology components: evidence on the Porter Hypothesis? Applied Economics, v. 46, n. 5, p. 503-526, 2014.
HAMAMOTO, M. Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries. Resource and Energy Economics, v. 28, p. 299-312, 2006.
HORBACH, J. Determinants of environmental innovation - new evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, v. 37, n.1, p. 163-173, 2008.
HORVÁTHOVÁ, E. The impact of environmental performance on firm performance: short-term costs and long-term benefits. Ecological Economics, v. 84, p. 91-97, 2012.
INOUE, E.; ARIMURA, T. H.; NAKANO, M. A new insight into environmental innovation: does the maturity of environmental management systems matter? Ecological Economics, v. 94, p. 156-163, 2013.
JAFFE, A.B.; PALMER, K. Environmental regulation and innovation: a panel data study. Economics and Statistics, v. 79, p. 610-619, 1997.
KATARIA, M. The role of preferences in disagreements over scientific hypothesis: evidence on cognitive bias in formation of beliefs. The Journal of Socio-Economics, v. 41, n. 4, p. 364-369, 2012.
KÓZLUK, T.; ZIPPERER, V. Environmental policies and productivity growth – a critical review of empirical findings. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, v. 88, p. 1-37, nov., 2013.
KRIECHEL, B.; ZIESEMER, T. The environmental Porter Hypothesis: theory, evidence and a model of timing of adoption. Economics of Innovation & New Technology, v. 18, n.3, p. 267-294, 2009.
LANOIE, P.; PATRY, M.; LAJEUNESSE, R. Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Poductivity Analysis, v. 30, p. 121-128, 2008.
LANOIE, P.; LAURENT-LUCCHETI, J.; JOHNSTONE, N.; AMBEC, S. Environmental policy, innovation and performance: new insights on the Porter hypothesis. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, v. 20, n. 3, p. 803-842, 2011.
LIM, S.; PRAKASH, A. Voluntary regulations and innovation: the case of ISO 14001. Public Administration Review, v. 74, n. 2, p. 233-244, 2014.
LINDMARK, M.; BERGQUIST, A. K. Expansion for pollution reduction? Environmental adaptation of a Swedish and a Canadian metal smelter, 1960-2005. Business History, v. 50, n. 4, p. 530-546, 2008.
LIU, X.; DAI, H.; CHENG, P. Drivers of integrated environmental innovation and impact on company competitiveness: evidence from 18 Chinese firms. Journal of Technology and Globalisation, v. 5, n. 3/4, p. 255-280, 2011.
LÓPEZ-GAMERO, M. D.; CLAVER-CORTÉS, E.; MOLINA-AZORÍN, J. F. Evaluating environmental regulation in Spain using process control and preventive techniques. European Journal of Operational Research, v. 2 n. 1, p. 497-518, 2009.
LUNDGREN, T.; MARKLUND, P.-O. Climate policy, environmental performance, and profits. Journal of Productivity Analysis, v. 44, p. 225-235, 2015.
MAÇANEIRO, M. B.; CUNHA, S. K. da; KUHL, M. R.; CUNHA, J. C. da. A regulamentação ambiental conduzindo estratégias ecoinovativas na indústria de papel e celulose. Revista de Administração Contemporânea – RAC, v. 19, n. 1, p. 65-83, jan./fev., 2015.
MANAGI, S.; OPALUCH, J. J.; DI, J.; GRIGALUNAS, T. A. Environmental Regulations and Technological Change in the Offshore Oil and Gas Industry. Land Economics, v. 81, n. 2, p. 303-319, 2005.
MOHR, R. D. Technical change, external economies, and the Porter Hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, n. 43, p. 158-168, 2002.
MOHR, R. D.; SAHA, Shrawantee. Distribution of environmental costs and benefits, additional distortions, and the Porter hypothesis. Land Economics, v. 84, n. 4, p. 689-700, nov., 2008.
OBERNDORFER, U.; RENNINGS, K. Costs and competitiveness effects of the European Union emissions trading scheme. European Environment, v. 17, p. 1-17, 2007.
POPP, D. Uncertain R&D and the Porter hypothesis. Contributions to Economic Analysis & Policy, v. 4, n. 1, set., 2005.
PORTER, M. E. America’s Green Strategy. Scientific American, v. 264, n. 4, p. 96, april, 1991.
PORTER, M. E.; van der LINDE, C. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Jornal of Economic Perspectives, v. 9, n. 4, p. 97-118, 1995.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. The effect of clean water regulation on profitability: testing the Porter hypothesis. Land Economics, v. 96, n. 2, p. 329-344, may, 2010.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. Short-run and long-run implications of environmental regulation on financial performance. Contemporary Economic Policy, v. 29, n. 3, p. 357-373, 2011.
RASSIER, D. G.; EARNHART, D. Effects of environmental regulation on actual and expected profitability. Ecological Economics, v. 112, p. 129-140, 2015.
RAZUMOVA, M.; IBÁÑEZ, J. L.;REY, J. Drivers of environmental innovation in Majorca hotels. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, v. 23, n. 10, p. 1529-1549, 2015.
RENNINGS, K.; RAMMER, C. The impact of regulation-driven environmental innovation on innovation sucess and firm performance. Zew -Centre for European Economic Research Discussion, n. 10-065, p. 1-34, 2010.
RUBASHKINA, Y.; GALEOTTI, M.; VERDOLINI, E.. Environmental regulation and competitiveness: empirical evidence on the Porter hypothesis from european manufacturing sectors. Energy Policy, v. 83, p. 288-300, 2015.
SADEGHZADEH, J. The impact of environmental policies on productivity and market competition. Environment and Development Economics, v. 19, n. 5, 2014.
SCHLUGA, T. R. Some micro-evidence on the “Porter hypothesis” from Austrian VOC emission standards. Growth and Change, v. 34, n. 3, p. 359-379, 2003.
SMITH, V. K.; AYERBE, C. Do Painless Environmental Policies Exist? Journal of Risk & Uncertainty, v. 73, p. 73-94, 2000.
STELLA, B.; AGGREY, N.; ESEZA, K. Firm size and rate of growth of Ugandan manufacturing firms. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, v. 4, n. 3, p. 178-188, 2014.
TACHIZAWA, T. Gestão ambiental e responsabilidade social corporativa: estratégias de negócios focadas na realidade brasileira. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2007.
TRIEBSWETTER, U.; WACKERBAUER, J. Integrated environmental product innovation and impacts on company competitiveness: a case study of the automotive industry in the region of Munich. European Environmental, v. 18, p. 30-44, 2008a.
TRIEBSWETTER, U.; WACKERBAUER, J. Integrated environmental product innovation in the region of Munich and its impact on company competitiveness. Journal of Cleaner Production, v. 16, p. 1484-1493, 2008b.
VLIST, A. J. van der; WITHAGEN, C.; FOLMER, H. Technical efficiency under alternative environmental regulatory regimes: the case of Dutch horticulture. Ecological Economics, v. 63, n. 1, p. 165-173, 2007.
YANG , X.; YAO, Y. Environmental compliance and firm performance: evidence from China. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, v. 74, n. 3, p. 397-424, 2012.
YANG, C.-H.; TSENG, Y.-H.; CHEN, C.-P. Environmental regulations, induced R&D, and productivity: evidence from Taiwan’s manufacturing industries. Resource and Energy Economics, v. 34, p. 514-532, 2012.
ZIESERMER, T. A knowledge-based view of the Porter Hypothesis. Environmental Policy and Governance, v. 23, n. 3, p. 193-208, 2013.