Conference Agenda

This study examines the determinants of industrial energy demand in five new European Union member states (Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovenia). We focus on the effects of energy prices, output, investment, and technological progress. Using a panel dataset covering 16 industrial sectors across 24 years, we employ the Mean Group estimation techniques, including the Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (CCE-MG) and dynamic Common Correlated Effects Mean Group (DCCE-MG). Our analysis addresses issues of heterogeneity, cross-sectional dependence (CD), and persistence often overlooked in studies relying on fixed effects. Our empirical results show that activity levels (output) and energy prices consistently drive energy consumption, with their effects amplified when cross-correlations are accounted for. Investment positively contributes to energy use, reflecting increased demand during industrial expansion or modernization, while research and development have limited impact. These findings provide valuable insights to policymakers on energy solutions to influence energy demand and mitigate the pressures of industrial growth.

With the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the European response of the Green Industrial Plan, the role of green R&D support in the climate policy mix is receiving renewed interest. The question arises whether R&D support can replace politically unfeasible emission pricing and reduce emissions? Can it improve the competitiveness of domestic industries? We argue that the contribution of R&D support strongly depends on the accompanying emission pricing policy, which can be either non-existent (as at the US national level), an emissions trading scheme (as for EU industry), or an emission tax (as currently applied in many EU non-industrial sectors). We use a stylized equilibrium model to analyze the role and impact of R&D support under different environmental policies. We find that R&D support is part of an optimal policy mix and thus increases social welfare. We find that the role of a green R&D subsidy is primarily an industrial policy rather than an environmental policy. Competitive gains can always be achieved through subsidization irrespective of the type of green R&D subsidy and the environmental policy in place. The reduction of emission only occurs under an emission tax or under no environmental policy. Since the change in emissions also determines the welfare effect, a welfare gain is only achieved under an emission tax or no environmental policy. In case of an emission cap, an R\&D subsidy determines the ratio of clean to dirty output and any emission saving through more clean output or improvements in emission intensity are completely rebounded.

Communities and economies have an increasing need for climate change adaptation technologies to cope with changing climate and extreme weather events. While inventions and innovation activities that target emission abatement have been extensively studied, we know very little about the characteristics of innovation activities in climate change adaptation. This study examines granted climate change adaptation patents filed at the USPTO from 1976 to 2020 and compares their characteristics to climate change mitigation technology patents and other patents. The study analyzes patents’ social and private economic value as well as inter-technology knowledge spillovers. Empirical findings show that climate change adaptation patents are cited more often, but not more broadly, than climate change mitigation patents or non-green patents. Adaptation patents also have larger patent families indicating a higher private value of these inventions. However, these characteristics do not translate into a higher stock market valuation.

Greenwashing is a highly debated phenomenon, and the legislation, at least in the European Union, is rapidly evolving in a direction of empowering consumers in understanding the nature of green efforts exerted and/or advertised by firms. In this paper, we start from this policy relevant consideration and aim at empirically assessing the potential impact of greenwashing on green R&D effort by firms, providing potential support for the legislative evolution in the EU and, more generally, policy relevant considerations. We move a first step in addressing the impact of greenwashing on green innovation by firms, measuring the latter through patent applications, while greenwashing is measured by an original indicator combining information on companies’ environmental performance with information about the extent of companies’ disclosure of environment-related information. Our preliminary results show that greenwashing has a negative impact on patents applications, at least in our preferred estimates. We also focus on a conceptual setting that may help to explain our results, specifically in relation to the way in which greenwashing may steer resources away from green innovation through demand side drivers.

Inspired by the controversial political debate in the European Union (EU) about legal initia-tives to protect human rights and the environment along supply chains (e.g., the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, CSDDD), this paper examines individual preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for different designs of supply chain laws that are stricter than current national legislation. Our econometric analysis is based on data from a stated choice experiment included in a representative online survey of 507 individuals from Germany. Our estimation results show that, on average, individuals in Germany prefer stricter supply chain laws than the existing national Supply Chain Act. The majority expects positive sustainability impacts of supply chain laws, while there is ambiguity of whether the economic impacts are predominantly positive or negative. Our results imply that citizens’ preferences are not fully reflected in the political debate. In particular, the strong opposition of conservative and liberal parties in Germany to a tightening supply chain legislation is only partially supported by our results. Our findings can therefore serve as a basis for developing legislation in a way that is consistent with citizens’ preferences.

This article explores the intricate relationship between economic growth and environmental sustainability. It contrasts two perspectives: 'green growth,' which espouses the notion of compatibility between the two, and 'degrowth,' which posits the potential for discord.The objective is to furnish empirical evidence that advances the discourse on the manner in which economic growth can be rendered more sustainable.The article addresses two significant global challenges: stagnating productivity, wages, and job creation, along with the escalating unsustainability of the global economy, particularly with regard to climate change. The article advocates for a shift in economic measurements beyond traditional GDP, incorporating human, natural, and man-made capital through the concept of inclusive wealth.To measure true economic progress, the article introduces Total Sustainable Productivity (TSP), an extension of traditional Total Factor Productivity (TFP) that includes environmental and social factors. The analysis employs stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) to assess European economies from 1960 to 2022, with a focus on institutional quality, innovation, financial openness, and environmental policies as key drivers of TSP growth.The findings indicate that social and natural capital play a critical role in national productivity, and that TSP provides a more stable measure of growth compared to TFP, particularly in the post-2000 period. The study identifies key factors for enhancing sustainable growth, such as improving governance, fostering innovation, promoting financial openness, and implementing strong environmental policies.