经济增长和环境质量相容性政策条件——环境技术进步方向视角下的政策偏向效应检验

现有文献关注政策规制的经济与环境绩效,却并未重视不同类型政策的技术偏向,以及技术偏态情境中经济增长和环境质量相容发展的政策条件。本文扩展Acemoglu等(2012)的环境技术进步方向模型,数理演绎不同性质政策的技术偏向,以及技术进步方向转变时经济增长和环境质量的动态演化过程,再结合我国经济数据进行政策效果评价。研究结果发现:(1)环境技术进步方向是技术研发效率和环境政策累积作用的结果,环境政策会通过影响不同类型技术创新激励的方式,改变环境技术进步方向。(2)异质性政策转变技术进步方向,影响经济增长和环境质量,其作用存在不同的着力点和偏向性。其中,研发补贴政策的清洁技术偏向和产出激励效果明显,而规制类政策的环境质量效应优于研发补贴,但其对经济增长的作用表现出非线性U型特征。(3)单一政策干预往往难以破除经济增长和环境质量的两难困境,而政策组合的效果明显优于单一政策,特别是在碳排放权交易试点地区实施研发补贴政策,以及在碳排放权交易试点地区同时实行环境税与研发补贴,效果明显优于实施单一政策。但最优的政策组合并非固定不变,而往往处于动态变化过程中。

Policy Conditions for Compatibility between Economic Growth and Environmental Quality: A Test of Policy Bias Effects from the Perspective of the Direction of Environmental Technological Progress

China’s environmental performance index(EPI) ranks fourth from the bottom in the world, making it the"worst-hit area"for PM2.5 pollution, according to the"2018 environmental performance index report by Yale university". Faced with increasingly serious environmental problems, the Chinese government has begun to strengthen environmental protection in all aspects, raise residents’ awareness of environmental protection and advocate green production. However, there is a first-mover advantage in non-cleaner production in a free market environment, and the incentive for clean technology is insufficient. Although the government has been seeking a balance between economic and the environmentthrough environmental policies, the effects of these policies are still unsatisfactory. How to implement policy intervention to break the dilemma between economic and environmental has become an urgent problem.The literature of environmental policies ignores the relationship between policy and direction of technological progress,and what kind of policy combination can achieve the compatible development of economicand environmental.Based on this, this paper expands the model of environmental technology progress direction of Acemoglu et al.(2012) from the perspective of heterogeneous policies, mathematically deduces the dynamic equilibrium process of different environmental policies and technological progress direction. Combined with China’s economic data, numerically simulates and empirically teststhe transformation effect of technological progress direction of different policies, and to explore the policy conditions for the compatible development of economic and environmental from the perspective of technological progress direction, as well as the possible desirable combination of policies. To make up for the deficiency of existing literature that only focuses on the single environmental policy and its direct economic environmental effect.The results show that:(1) The direction of environmental technology progress is the cumulative effects of technology R&D efficiency and environmental policy. Environmental policy will change the direction of technology progress by influencing different types of incentives for technological innovation.(2) Heterogeneous policies affect economic growth and environmental quality by changing the direction of technological progress, and the impact has different focus and bias.The effect of R&D subsidy is obvious on cleantechnology and output, while the environmental quality effect of regulation policy is better than that of R&D subsidy, but its effect on economic growth has a U-shaped characteristics.(3) Single policy intervention is difficult to break the dilemmaof economic growth and environmental quality, and the effects of policy combinations is obviously better than that of single policy. Especially in the pilot areas of carbon emissions trading, the implementation of R&D subsidy and the implementation of environmental tax and R&D subsidy at the same timeare significantly better than that of single policy. But the optimal policy combination is not fixed, and often appears dynamic.In order to achieve the compatible development of economy and environment, we suggest:Firstly,the government should reasonably weigh the relative benefits of policies on environmentalimprovement and economic growth, ensure the appropriate timing and intensity of policy,minimize the negative impact of environmental policies on economic.Secondly, we need clearly defined the differences between clean and non-clean technology subsidies to prevent policy deviating from environmental optimization objectives.Especiallyemphasis on using a variety of policy tools such as fiscal subsidies, tax and price incentives to stimulate clean technology progress. Thirdly, the government should attach importance to the emphasis and bias of regulation and subsidy policy, and design the policy combinations dynamically to achieve the compatible development of economy and environment.