Search

In this article, eco-efficiency – ‘sustainable development at the company level’ or ‘value added per environmental impact’ – is operationalized at the production unit level. An eco-efficiency index is developed and tested with 31 Finnish and 37 Swedish pulp, paper and board mills in 1993–1996. In essence, gross value added without a change in inventories is divided by environmental impact aggregated with seven valuation methods. The definition of eco-efficiency as sustainable development at the company level appears to be problematic. [Eco]2-efficiency does not include the third, ethical dimension sustainable development, but only ecology and economy. Value added is a limited indicator of economic performance and very sensitive to changes in market prices, while environmental impact changes with valuation assumptions. The Swedish mills were generally more eco-efficient, while the Finnish mills were more eco-efficient in integrated woodfree paper, solid bleached sulphate board and liquid packaging board. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental regulation may lead to undesired economic consequences. China has tightened its environmental policies to deal with severe environmental pollution in recent years, but existing studies pay little attention to the economic consequences of China's environmental policies. Using the panel data of 211 prefecture‐level and above cities in China from 2003 to 2016, we for the first time estimate the economic impact of the environmental protection admonishing talk (EPAT) policy, a newly implemented environmental regulation policy in China. We use the difference‐in‐differences strategy to identify the economic effects of the EPAT policy combined with the propensity score matching method to control a potential selection problem. The results show that a relative decline occurs in gross domestic product per capita in target cities after the implementation of the EPAT, and the negative impact is exerted on the secondary industry rather than the tertiary industry. Furthermore, we find that target cities respond to the environmental protection requirements of higher authorities through a one‐size‐fits‐all approach of limiting the production activities of industrial enterprises. Meanwhile, the EPAT policy does not improve environmental efficiency. Such findings are instructive for policymakers who need to trade off economic welfare and environmental quality when formulating and implementing new environmental policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]