Abstract

This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on the issue of the environmental performance and institutions quality. The main purpose of the research is an econometric model which incorporates macroeconomic and institutional variables in a sample of 187 countries observed during the period 2002-2015. Systematization literary sources and approaches for solving the problem of the difference of institutions quality and values of environment performance index. Methodological tools of the research methods were 14 years of research contain 48 developed countries and 139 developing countries. We used dynamic panel data models and especially the system Generalized Method of Moment (GMM) estimator of Arellano and Bover (1995). The research empirically confirms and theoretically proves that the level of growth proxied by the GDPG exerts a positive effect on the level of the environmental performance and institutional quality, (represented by control of corruption, regulatory quality, government effectiveness and rule of law and act), are significantly on the environment performance for the whole sample. Then, we prove that a good institutions quality enhance a significantly environment performance for developed countries. The results of the research can be useful for developing countries indicate that all variables reflected institution qualities decreased the environmental performance except for the government effectiveness which exerts a positive and significant effect.  

Keywords: developed countries, developing countries, environmental performance, institutional quality, GMM estimator

JEL Classification: O11, Q56.

Cite as: Dkhili, H. (2018). Environmental performance and institutions quality: evidence from developed and developing countries. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 3, 333-344. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2018.3-30

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Alt, E. and H. Spitzeck (2016). “Improving environmental performance through unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors for the environment: A capability perspective.” Journal of Environmental Management 182: 48-58.
2. Alt, E. and H. Spitzeck (2016). “Improving environmental performance through unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors for the environment: A capability perspective.” Journal of Environmental Management 182: 48-58.
3. Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., et al. (2004). “The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 29(5–6): 447-471.
4. Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., et al. (2004). “The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 29(5–6): 447-471.
5. Arellano, M. and O. Bover (1995). “Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models.” Journal of Econometrics 68(1): 29-51.
6. Bohringer, C. and P. Jochem (2007). “Measuring the immeasurable — A survey of sustainability indices.” Ecological Economics 63(1): 1-8
7. Carrión-Flores, C. E. and R. Innes (2010). “Environmental innovation and environmental performance.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 59(1): 27-42.
8. Chikalipah, S. (2017). “Institutional Environment and Microfinance Performance in Sub-Saharan Africa.” African Development Review 29(1): 16-27.
9. Cho, C. H., et al. (2010). “The language of US corporate environmental disclosure.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 35(4): 431-443.
10. Cracolici, M. F., et al. (2009). “The Measurement of Economic, Social and Environmental Performance of Countries: A Novel Approach.” Social Indicators Research 95(2): 339.
11. Cracolici, M. F., et al. (2010). “The Measurement of Economic, Social and Environmental Performance of Countries: A Novel Approach.” Social Indicators Research 95(2): 339-356.
12. Distaso, A. (2007). “Well-being and/or quality of life in EU countries through a multidimensional index of sustainability.” Ecological Economics 64(1): 163-180.
13. Duit, A., and al. (2009). “Saving the Woodpeckers: Social Capital, Governance, and Policy Performance, ” The Journal of Environment & Development 18(1): 42-61.
14. Ebert, U. and H. Welsch (2004). “Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 47(2): 270-283.
15. Echavarren, J. M. (2017). “From Objective Environmental Problems to Subjective Environmental Concern: A Multilevel Analysis Using 30 Indicators of Environmental Quality.” Society & Natural Resources 30(2): 145-159.
16. Husted, B. W. and J. M. d. Sousa-Filho (2017). “The impact of sustainability governance, country stakeholder orientation, and country risk on environmental, social, and governance performance.” Journal of Cleaner Production 155(Part 2): 93-102.
17. Jamali, D., et al. (2017). “CSR logics in developing countries: Translation, adaptation and stalled development.” Journal of World Business 52(3): 343-359.
18. Scruggs, L. (1999). “Institutions and Environmental Performance in Seventeen Western Democracies.” British Journal of Political Science 29(01): 1-31.
19. Swamy, A. and B. Fikkert (2002). “Estimating the Contributions of Capital and Labor to GDP: An Instrumental Variable Approach.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 50(3): 693-708.
20. Tamazian, A. and B. Bhaskara Rao (2010). “Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies.” Energy Economics 32(1): 137-145.
21. Wang Xu-Mei.(2010). “Optimization of DNA isolation, ISSR-PCR system and primers screening of genuine species of rhubarb, an important herbal medicine in China.” Journal of Medicinal Plants Research 4.10: 904-908.