The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China's carbon emissions trading pilot
Abstract
Abstract Recently, research on environmental regulation and firms’ innovation has emerged in large numbers. However, the research on the impact of China's carbon emission trading system (CETS) pilot policy on innovation quality is really lack. In order to fill this gap, this paper uses the panel data of China's A-share listed firms in 2008-2016, and adopts difference in difference in difference (DDD) model constructs a quasi-natural experiment on the impacts of CETS on quantity and quality of innovation. The results show that the CETS has a significantly positive effect on the quantity and quality of innovation, but the impact of the CETS on the innovation quantity, low-quality innovation and high-quality innovation are decreasing in turn. The CETS only promotes the innovation quantity and high-quality innovation of state-owned shares firms, large-size firms and eastern-section firms. In addition, according to mechanism test, after the implementation of the CETS pilot, if the government simultaneously reduces subsidies to “treatment group” firms, it can not only enlarge the direct promotion effect of CETS on the quantity and quality of innovation, but also eliminate the offsetting effect of government subsidies on “compliance costs”, thereby Indirectly promote the improvement of the quantity and quality of innovation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship
Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.9.4.97 · Cited by 13,365
Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market
Calel, R., & Dechezleprêtre, A. (2016) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00470 · Cited by 1,147
Technological Change and the EU ETS: The Case of Ireland
Anderson, B., Convery, F., & Di Maria, C. (2011) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1855495 · Cited by 33
Cited by
Liu, Y., Liu, S., Shao, X., & He, Y. (2022) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111779 · Cited by 204
Do regional emission trading schemes lead to carbon leakage within firms? Evidence from Japan
Sadayuki, T., & Arimura, T. H. (2021) · Energy Economics · doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105664 · Cited by 58
Bian, Z., Liu, J., Zhang, Y., Peng, B., & Jiao, J. (2024) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140943 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Hu, J., Pan, X., & Huang, Q.
- Venue
- Technological Forecasting and Social Change
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-09
- Volume
- 158
- Pages
- 120122
- ISSN
- 0040-1625 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3036654252
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 37.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China's carbon emissions trading pilot. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120122
- The paper
- Hu, J., Pan, X., & Huang, Q. (2020). Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China's carbon emissions trading pilot. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120122
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.