기술혁신연구 (Journal of Technology Innovation)

기술경영경제학회 (Korea Society for Innovation Managemetn & Economics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

환경규제, 기업 이질성, 그리고 기업의 혁신 활동에 대한 행태적 접근

Environmental Regulation, Firm Heterogeneity and Innovation

  • 박민제 (티맥스 엔터프라이즈) ;
  • 진병채 (한국과학기술원 경영대학 경영공학부)
  • 투고 : 2022.02.18
  • 심사 : 2022.02.23
  • 발행 : 2022.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

정교히 디자인된 정부의 환경규제는 기업의 혁신을 촉진할 수 있다는 마이클 포터의 주장 이후로 환경규제와 기업혁신간의 관계에 대해 많은 선행 연구가 진행되었다. 선행 연구의 결과를 보면, 정부 규제의 효과성에 대해 여전히 상충되는 결과를 보이기도 한다. 이에, 본 연구에서는 기업 행태 이론과 기업 이질성 관점에 기반하여, 환경규제의 강도와 정부의 규제 발표 후 실제 시행될 때까지 남은 기간의 정도가 개별 기업의 혁신 활동에 어떤 영향을 주는지 실증 분석하였다. 미국의 자동차 연비규제 사례를 바탕으로 분석한 결과, 발표된 환경규제 기준을 달성하지 못한 후발 기업의 경우 규제의 강도가 증가함에 따라 선도기업 대비 기존과는 다른 기술 지식을 탐색하지만 출원하는 특허의 임팩트는 감소하는 경향성을 보였다. 또한, 규제 시행일이 다가옴에 따라, 후발 기업은 선도 기업 대비 더 많은 특허를 출원했지만, 출원한 특허의 임팩트는 감소하는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 실증 결과는 정부의 환경규제에 대응하는 기업의 혁신 전략이 성과에 대한 기대 수준, 기대 수준과 실제 성과간 격차, 그리고 기업의 기술 역량에 따라 어떻게 달라질 수 있는지 검증하였다는 점에 그 이론적, 실무적 공헌점이 있다.

Since Michael Porter (1991) has proposed that environmental regulation can help a firm increase its competitiveness by encouraging it to engage in more innovative activities to meet the environmental regulation, a number of researchers have empirically investigated the "Porter Hypothesis." However, the empirical results still remain mixed. Combining the perspectives of the behavioral theory of the firm and firm heterogeneity, we argue that the levels of regulation stringency and time-pressure would differentially influence a firm's innovative behavior depending on the firm's aspiration level, performance feedback and technological capabilities. Using the U.S. Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) regulation context, we empirically demonstrate that lagging firms that do not meet the new regulation standard announced by the government tend to search for more distant knowledge and that the impact of the patents they file for decreases as the regulation becomes more stringent. In addition, we also find that as time-pressure increases, lagging firms stand to apply for more patents than do leading firms whereas the overall impact of the patents decreases. These results help us advance our understanding of the nuanced causal relationship between regulation and innovation and provide practical implications for policymakers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Abdel-Hamid, T. K. (1989), "The Dynamics of Software Project Staffing: A System Dynamics Based Simulation Approach", IEEE Transactions on Software engineering, 15(2), 109-119. https://doi.org/10.1109/32.21738
  2. Amabile, T. M., Mueller, J. S., Simpson, W.B., Hadley, C. N., Kramer, S. J., & Fleming, L. (2002), "Time Pressure and Creativity in Organizations: A Longitudinal Field Study". Working paper, Harvard Business School.
  3. Ambec, S., Cohen, M. A., Elgie, S., & Lanoie, P. (2013), "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?", Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 7(1), 2-22. doi:10.1093/reep/res016
  4. Andrews, F. M., & Farris., G. F. (1972), "Time Pressure and Performance of Scientists and Engineers: A Five-Year Panel Study", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8(2), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(72)90045-1
  5. Ashford, N. A., Ayers, C., & Stone, R.F. (1985), "Using Regulation to Change the Market for Innovation", Harvard Environmental Law Review, 9(2), 419-466.
  6. Bauman, Y., Lee, M., & Seeley, K. (2008), "Does Technological Innovation Really Reduce Marginal Abatement Costs? Some Theory, Algebraic Evidence, and Policy Implications", Environmental and Resource Economics, 40(4), 507-527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9167-7
  7. Boeker, W. (1989), "Strategic Change: The Effects of Founding and History", Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 489-515. https://doi.org/10.2307/256432
  8. Bolton, M. K. (1993), "Organizational Innovation and Substandard Performance: When is Necessity the Mother of Innovation?", Organization Science, 4(1), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.4.1.57
  9. Bromiley, P. (1991), "Testing a Causal Model of Corporate Risk Taking and Performance", The Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 37-59. https://doi.org/10.2307/256301
  10. Brunnermeier, S. B., & Cohen, M. A. (2003), "Determinants of Environmental Innovation in US Manufacturing Industries", Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45(2), 278-293. doi:10.1016/s0095-0696(02)00058-x
  11. Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (2001), "Organizational Actions in Response to Threats and Opportunities", The Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 937-955. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069439
  12. Chong, D. S. F., Eerde, W. V., Chai, K. H., & Rutte, C. G. (2011), "A Double-Edged Sword: The Effects of Challenge and Hindrance Time Pressure on New Product Development Teams", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(1), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2010.2048914
  13. Clark, K. B., & Fujimoto, T. (1991), "Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World auto Industry", Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
  14. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990), "Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation", Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
  15. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963),"Behavioral Theory of the Firm" (Vol. 43), Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
  16. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Tabrizi, B. N. (1995), "Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry", Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 84-110. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393701
  17. Energy Independence and Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 17001 (2007).
  18. Energy Policy and Conservation Act, (1975).
  19. Greve, H. R. (1998), "Performance, Aspirations, and Risky Organizational Change", Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 58-86. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393591
  20. Greve, H. R. (2003a), "A Behavioral Theory of R&D Expenditures and Innovations: Evidence from Shipbuilding", The Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 685-702. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040661
  21. Greve, H. R. (2003b), "Organizational Learning from Performance Feedback", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  22. Griliches, Z. (1990), "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey", Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661-1707.
  23. Hausman, J. A., Hall, B. H., & Griliches, Z. (1984). "Econometric Models for Count data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship", Econometrica, 52(4), 909-938. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911191
  24. Hu, S., He, Z.-L., Blettner, D. P., & Bettis, R. A. (2017), "Conflict Inside and Outside: Social Comparisons and Attention Shifts in Multidivisional Firms", Strategic Management Journal, 38(7), 1435-1454. doi:10.1002/smj.2556
  25. Jaffe, A. B., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2002), "Environmental Policy and Technological Change", Environmental and Resource Economics, 22(1-2), 41-70. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015519401088
  26. Jaffe, A. B., & Palmer, K. (1997),"Environmental Regulation and Innovation: A Panel Data Study." Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4), 610-619. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465397557196
  27. Jelinek, M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1990), "The Innovation Marathon: Lessons from High Technology Firms", Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  28. Johnstone, N., Hascic, I., & Popp, D. (2010), "Renewable Energy Policies and Technological Innovation: Evidence based on Patent Counts", Environmental and Resource Economics, 45(1), 133-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9309-1
  29. Kelly, D., & Amburgey, T. L. (1991), "Organizational Inertia and Momentum: A Dynamic Model of Strategic Change", Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 591-612. https://doi.org/10.2307/256407
  30. Kemp, R. (1997), "Environmental Policy and Technical Change", Edward Elgar.
  31. Kim, J.-Y., Finkelstein, S., & Haleblian, J. (2015), "All Aspirations are not Created Equal: The Differential Effects of Historical and Social Aspirations on Acquisition Behavior", Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1361-1388. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.1102
  32. Kim, J.-Y., & Miner, A. S. (2007), "Vicarious Learning from the Failures and Near-Failures of Others: Evidence from the U.S. Commercial Banking Industry", Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 687-714.
  33. Kumpe, T., & Bolwijn, P. T. (1994), "Toward the Innovative Firm-Challenge for R&D Management", Research Technology Management, 37(1), 38-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.1994.11670953
  34. Lee, J., Veloso, F. M., & Hounshell, D. A. (2011), "Linking Induced Technological Change, and Environmental Regulation: Evidence from Patenting in the US Auto Industry", Research policy, 40(9), 1240-1252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.06.006
  35. Levinthal, D., & March, J. G. (1981), "A Model of Adaptive Organizational Search", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 2, 307-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(81)90012-3
  36. Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988), "Organizational Learning", Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
  37. Mansfield, E., Schwartz, M., & Wagner., S. (1981), "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study", The Economic Journal, 91(364), 907-918. https://doi.org/10.2307/2232499
  38. March, J. G. (1991), "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning", Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  39. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958),"Organizations", John Wiley & Sons, New York.
  40. McDonald, M. L., & Westphal, J. D.(2003), "Getting by with the Advice of Their Friends: CEOs' Advice Networks and Firms' Strategic Responses to Poor Performance", Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556617
  41. Mohr, R. D. (2002), "Technical Change, External Economies, and the Porter Hypothesis", Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 43(1), 158-168. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2000.1166
  42. OECD. (2011), "Invention and Transfer of Environmental Technologies".
  43. Palmer, T. B., & Wiseman, R. M. (1999), "Decoupling Risk Taking from Income Stream Uncertainty: A Holistic Model of Risk", Strategic Management Journal, 20(11), 1037-1062. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199911)20:11<1037::AID-SMJ67>3.0.CO;2-2
  44. Pavitt, K. (1985), "Patent Statistics as Indicators of Innovative Activities: Possibilities and Problems", Scientometrics, 7(1-2), 77-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02020142
  45. Popp, D. (2003), "Pollution Control Innovations and the Clean Air Act of 1990", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(4), 641-660. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.10159
  46. Popp, D. (2005), "Lessons from Patents: Using Patents to Measure Technological Change in Environmental Models", Ecological Economics, 54(2-3), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.001
  47. Porter, M. (1991), "America's Green Strategy", Scientific American, 264(4), 168. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0491-168
  48. Porter, M., & Van der Linde, C. (1995), "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97-118. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.97
  49. Powell, T. C., Lovallo, D., & Caringal, C. (2006), "Causal Ambiguity, Management Perception, and Firm Performance", The Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 175-196. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.19379630
  50. Rothwell, R. (1992), "Industrial Innovation and Government Environmental Regulation: Some Lessons from the Past", Technovation, 12(7), 447-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4972(92)90050-R
  51. Schneider, S. L. (1992), "Framing and Conflict: Aspiration Level Contingency, the Status Quo, and Current Theories of Risky Choice", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 1040-1057. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.18.5.1040
  52. Shefer, D., & Frenkel, A. (2005), "R&D, Firm Size and Innovation: An Empirical Analysis", Technovation, 25(1), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00152-4
  53. Shiau, C.-S. N., Michalek, J. J., & Hendrickson, C. T. (2009), "A Structural Analysis of Vehicle Design Responses to Corporate Average Fuel Economy Policy", Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(9-10), 814-828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2009.08.002
  54. Talay, M. B., & Yoon, E. (2013), "Corporate Response to the Regulations for Sustainability: A Case Study of the Leading Global Corporations", Journal of International Management Studies, 13(1), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.18374/JIMS-13-1.5
  55. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974), "Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases", Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
  56. Vissa, B., Greve, H. R., & Chen, W.-R. (2010), "Business Group Affiliation and Firm Search Behavior in India: Responsiveness and Focus of Attention", Organization Science, 21(3), 696-712. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0475
  57. Walker, H., Di Sisto, L., & McBain, D. (2008), "Drivers and Barriers to Environmental Supply Chain Management Practices: Lessons from the Public and Private Sectors", Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 14(1), 69-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2008.01.007