市场与规制双重不确定下企业环境投资行为选择

doi:10.12005/orms.2021.0123

运筹与管理 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (4): 148-154.DOI: 10.12005/orms.2021.0123

市场与规制双重不确定下企业环境投资行为选择

葛世龙^1,2, 刘小峰³

1.南京审计大学信息工程学院,江苏南京 211815;
2.上海交通大学安泰经济与管理学院,上海 200030;
3.南京财经大学会计学院,江苏南京 210023

收稿日期:2019-05-07 出版日期:2021-04-25
通讯作者: 刘小峰(1983-),男,江西瑞金人,副教授,博士,研究方向:环境行为与环境管理、无形资产评估。
作者简介:葛世龙(1980-),男,浙江天台人,副教授,博士,研究方向:能源-经济-环境(3E)系统建模与优化。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(71671080);江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(PAPD);江苏省青蓝工程资助项目;江苏省公共工程审计重点实验室课题研究基金(GGSS2016-02)

Study on Behavior Choice of Corporate Environmental Investment under Double Uncertainty of Market and Regulation

GE Shi-long^1,2, LIU Xiao-feng³

1. School of Information Engineering, Nanjing Audit University, Nanjing 211815, China;
2. Antai College of Economics & Management, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, China;
3. School of Accounting, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Nanjing 210023, China

Received:2019-05-07 Online:2021-04-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 通过主体适应性规则构建企业环境投资行为模型,从政府环境规制和市场波动等方面刻画企业环境投资决策面临的不确定性,基于计算实验方法探寻企业在基准、震荡、上涨与下跌等4种情景下的环境投资行为规律。研究发现:政府规制强度越强,企业环境投资越充分,但投资偏差现象越明显。在震荡情景中,企业的环境投资行为表现出非理性状态,在上涨情景中,企业环境投资表现出过度反应。当市场产品价格波动处在单边行情,政府可以通过较为宽松的环境规制实现目标,而当市场产品价格处在震荡波动时,政府需要通过较为严格的环境规制刺激企业进行环境投资。企业的环境投资受到政府规制与市场信号的共同影响,政府的环境规制稳定的持续刺激并不会让企业盲目投资,但政府环境规制的频繁变动却会使企业无所适从。

关键词: 环境规制, 市场波动, 环境投资, 计算实验, 投资效率

Abstract: A model is built to analyze corporate environmental investment behavior based on the agent’s self-adaptive rules. In government environmental regulation and market volatility, the uncertainty of corporate environmental investment decision is depicted. The laws of corporate environmental investment behaviors are explored by the method of computational experiment under four scenarios including benchmark, fluctuation, rise and fall. Experiments results show that environmental regulation uncertainty is positively related to a firm’s environmental investment. The stronger the intensity of government regulation, the more fully firm’s environmental investment. However, we find the investment’ bias is more obvious. In the oscillating situation, the behavior of corporate environmental investment is not rational. In the rising situation, the corporate environmental investment is an overreaction. When commodity price fluctuates at one side, the government can use flexible environmental regulation to achieve goals. However, when the commodity price shocks, government will need to use more strict environmental regulation to stimulate enterprises to invest in environment. Finally, both the government environmental regulation and market signal affect the environmental investment behavior. The continuous stimulation of the government environmental regulation will not cause enterprises to make blinded investment, but the frequent change of environmental regulations will make enterprises have no idea about taking their action.

Key words: environmental regulation, market fluctuations, environmental investment, computational experiments, investment efficiency

中图分类号:

F294
X32

葛世龙, 刘小峰. 市场与规制双重不确定下企业环境投资行为选择[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(4): 148-154.

GE Shi-long, LIU Xiao-feng. Study on Behavior Choice of Corporate Environmental Investment under Double Uncertainty of Market and Regulation[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2021, 30(4): 148-154.

参考文献

[1] 赖德胜,尹恒,蔡宁.政府的绿色投资[J].经济研究参考,2011,(1):26-39.
[2] Li D,Cao C,Zhang L et al.Effects of corporate environmental responsibility on financial performance: the moderating role of government regulation and organizational slack[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2017,166: 1323-1334.
[3] 沈红波,谢越,陈峥嵘.企业的环境保护、社会责任及其市场效应——基于紫金矿业环境污染事件的案例研究[J].中国工业经济,2012,(1):141-151.
[4] Yu S,Gao S,Sun H.A dynamic programming model for environmental investment decision-making in coal mining[J].Applied Energy,2016,166: 273-281.
[5] Bostian M,Färe R,Grosskopf S et al.Environmental investment and firm performance: a network approach[J].Energy Economics,2016,57: 243-255.
[6] Horváthová E.Does environmental performance affect financial performance? a meta-analysis[J].Ecological Economics,2010,70(1): 52-59.
[7] Barnett M,Salomon R.Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance[J].Strategic Management Journal,2012,33: 1304-1320.
[8] Dixon-Fowler H R,Slater D J,Johnson J L et al.Beyond “does it pay to be green?” a meta-analysis of moderators of the CEP-CFP relationship[J].Journal of Business Ethics,2013,112(2): 353-366.
[9] Pekovic S,Grolleau G,Mzoughi N.Environmental investments: too much of a good thing?[J].International Journal of Production Economics,2018,197: 297-302.
[10] Porter M E,Linde C V D.Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship[J].Journal of Economic Perspectives,1995,9(4): 97-118.
[11] Heyes A G,Liston-Heyes C.Corporate lobbying,regulatory conduct and the porter hypothesis[J].Environmental and Resource Economics,1999,13: 209-218.
[12] Xepapadeas A,Zeeuw A.Environmental policy and competitiveness: the porter hypothesis and the composition of capital[J].Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1999,37: 165-182.
[13] Yuan B,Xiang Q.Environmental regulation,industrial innovation and green development of Chinese manufacturing: based on an extended CDM model[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2018,176: 895-908.
[14] Costa-Campi M T,García-Quevedo J,Martínez-Ros E.What are the determinants of investment in environmental R&D?[J].Energy Policy,2017,104: 455-465.
[15] Christian E,Volker H H.Effects of regulatory uncertainty on corporate strategy: an analysis of forms' responses to uncertain about post-Kyoto policy[J].Environmental Science &Policy,2009,(12): 766-777.
[16] 邓学衷.国外环境规制与企业投资行为研究动态及启示[J].社会科学家,2014,(2):76-81.
[17] Bonato D,Schmutzler A.When do firms benefit from environmental regulations? a simple microeconomic approach to the porter Controversy[J].Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics,2000,136(4): 513-530.
[18] Xie R,Yuan Y,Huang J.Different types of environmental regulations and heterogeneous influence on “green” productivity: evidence from China[J].Ecological Economics,2017,132: 104-112.
[19] Jalil A,Adilah N,Ahmad M H,et al.Electricity load demand forecasting using exponential smoothing methods[J].World Applied Sciences Journal,2013,22(11): 1540-1543.
[20] Rivers L,Dempsey T,Mitchell J,et al.Environmental regulation and enforcement: structures,processes and the use of data for fraud detection[J].Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy &Management,2016,25(1): 128-129.
[21] 盛昭瀚,张维.管理科学研究中的计算实验方法[J].管理科学学报,2011,14(5):1-10.

市场与规制双重不确定下企业环境投资行为选择

Study on Behavior Choice of Corporate Environmental Investment under Double Uncertainty of Market and Regulation

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 9

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	宁烨, 张亚男, 刘琦. 环境规制对出口产品质量的影响研究——基于行业面板数据的实证分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(8): 217-224.
[2]	郑敏娜, 任广乾. 企业绿色创新行为的演化博弈分析——基于环保社会组织参与的视角[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(3): 15-21.
[3]	郭新帅, 张之玥, 居姗. 汇改与外汇市场波动性:大玩家理论的视角[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(1): 177-183.
[4]	潘峰, 刘月, 王琳. 公众参与视角下的央地环境规制博弈分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(6): 113-123.
[5]	孔繁彬, 原毅军. 环境规制、环境研发与绿色技术进步[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(2): 98-105.
[6]	潘峰, 王琳. 中国式分权下地方政府环境规制执行研究——以排污收费为例[J]. 运筹与管理, 2018, 27(2): 152-158.
[7]	潘峰, 西宝, 王琳. 环境规制中地方政府与中央政府的演化博弈分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2015, 24(3): 88-93.
[8]	孟庆峰, 李真, 陈敬贤. 不公平厌恶影响下的零售商销售努力自组织演化[J]. 运筹与管理, 2014, 23(3): 219-225.
[9]	薛红燕, 王怡, 孙菲, 孙裔德. 基于多层委托—代理关系的环境规制研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2013, 22(6): 249-255.