工业企业不同类型绿色技术创新内在关联与绩效传导路径

doi:10.18402/resci.2021.08.03

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

绿色技术创新可划分为末端治理技术创新、绿色工艺创新和绿色产品创新,在改进环境绩效和市场竞争力的同时,也能够提高企业的经济绩效。本文构建了绿色技术创新升级和经济绩效改善的关系模型,以642家工业企业为样本进行实证分析。研究结果表明：①企业3类绿色技术创新均能够显著改善其环境绩效和市场竞争力。②企业环境绩效和市场竞争力是经济绩效传导过程中的重要中介变量。③企业末端治理技术创新能够促进绿色工艺创新和绿色产品创新,企业绿色工艺创新能够正向影响企业的绿色产品创新,即不同类型绿色技术创新之间存在技术创新升级的空间。④不同类型绿色技术创新向经济绩效传导的路径存在一定的差异性,表现为绿色工艺创新能够直接产生经济绩效,而末端治理技术创新、绿色产品创新只能通过间接路径提高企业的经济绩效。通过上述研究识别了企业3种不同类型绿色技术创新之间的传导关系,对比分析了不同类型绿色技术创新经济绩效提升的异同性,给出了更多的企业绿色技术创新经济绩效提升的路径,对于深化绿色技术创新过程认识及优化政策设计具有重要意义。

关键词: 工业企业, 绿色技术创新, 创新关联, 创新绩效, 传导路径, 多重中介模型

Abstract:

Green technology innovations can be divided into end-of-pipe technology innovation, green process innovation, and green product innovation, which can improve the environmental performance as well as the economic performance of enterprises. Based on existing research, this study constructed a conceptual model of economic performance transmission with green technology innovation and upgrading, and conducted an empirical analysis using the survey data of 642 industrial enterprises. The results show that the three types of green technology innovation can significantly improve the environmental performance and market competitiveness of the enterprises. Enterprise environmental performance and market competitiveness are important meditation variables in the process of transmission. End-of-pipe technology innovation can positively affect green process innovation and green product innovation. Green process innovation of enterprises can positively promote green product innovation, and there is room for technology innovation upgrading between different types of green technology innovations. There are some differences in the transmission path from different types of green technology innovation to economic performance, which shows that green process innovation can directly generate higher economic performance, while the end-of-pipe technology innovation and green product innovation can only improve the economic performance of enterprises through indirect paths. Through this research, the relationship between different types of green technology innovation in enterprises is identified, more paths to improve the economic performance of green technology innovation in enterprises are given, and the similarities and differences between different types of green technology innovation are compared and analyzed, which is of great significance for deepening the understanding of green technology innovation process and optimizing policy design.

Key words: industrial enterprises, green technology innovation, relationship of innovations, innovation performance, transmission paths, multiple mediation model

汪明月, 李颖明, 王子彤. 工业企业不同类型绿色技术创新内在关联与绩效传导路径[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(8): 1534-1548.

WANG Mingyue, LI Yingming, WANG Zitong. Relationship and performance transmission paths of different types of green technology innovation in industrial enterprises[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(8): 1534-1548.

图/表 6

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

参考文献 44

[1]	曾刚, 陆琳忆, 何金廖. 生态创新对资源型城市产业结构与工业绿色效率的影响[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(1):94-103.
	[ Zeng G, Lu L Y, He J L. Impact of ecological innovation on the economic transformation of resource-based cities[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1):94-103.]
[2]	Peng B H, Zheng C Y, Wei G, et al. The cultivation mechanism of green technology innovation in manufacturing industry: From the perspective of ecological niche[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119711. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119711
[3]	Gente V, Pattanaro G. The place of eco-innovation in the current sustainability debate[J]. Waste Management, 2019, 88:96-101. doi: S0956-053X(19)30158-8 pmid: 31079654
[4]	Barbieri N, Marzucchi A, Rizzo U. Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?[J]. Research Policy, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103901. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103901
[5]	Cai X, Zhu B Z, Zhang H J, et al. Can direct environmental regulation promote green technology innovation in heavily polluting industries? Evidence from Chinese listed companies[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140810. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140810
[6]	Wu H, Qu Y Y. How do firms promote green innovation through international mergers and acquisitions: The moderating role of green image and green subsidy[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021, DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18147333 doi: 10.3390/ijerph18147333
[7]	Zhu L, Luo J, Dong Q L, et al. Green technology innovation efficiency of energy-intensive industries in China from the perspective of shared resources: Dynamic change and improvement path[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2021, DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120890. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120890
[8]	Hojnik J, Ruzzier M. The driving forces of process eco-innovation and its impact on performance: Insights from Slovenia[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 133:812-825. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.002
[9]	Sellitto M A, Camfield C G, Buzuku S. Green innovation and competitive advantages in a furniture industrial cluster: A survey and structural model[J]. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2020, 23:94-104. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.04.007
[10]	Li G P, Wang X Y, Su S B, et al. How green technological innovation ability influences enterprise competitiveness?[J]. Technology in Society, 2019, DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.04.012. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.04.012
[11]	Xie X M, Huo J G, Zou H L. Green process innovation, green product innovation, and corporate financial performance: A content analysis method[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2019, 101:697-706. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.010
[12]	Wang M Y, Li Y M, Li J Q, Wang Z T. Green process innovation, green product innovation and its economic performance improvement paths: A survey and structural model[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021, DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113282. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113282
[13]	熊爱华, 丁友强, 胡玉凤. 低碳门槛下绿色创新补贴对全要素生产率的影响[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(11):2184-2195.
	[ Xiong A H, Ding Y Q, Hu Y F. Impact of low-carbon subsidies and green innovation on total factor productivity in view of the threshold effect of carbon emission reduction[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(11):2184-2195.]
[14]	Xie X M, Huo J G, Qi G Y, et al. Green process innovation and financial performance in emerging economies: Moderating effects of absorptive capacity and green subsidies[J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 2016, 63(1):101-112. doi: 10.1109/TEM.2015.2507585
[15]	Dai R, Zhang J X. Green process innovation and differentiated pricing strategies with environmental concerns of South-North markets[J]. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 2017, 98:132-150. doi: 10.1016/j.tre.2016.12.009
[16]	Dong Y, Wang X, Jin J, et al. Effects of eco-innovation typology on its performance: Empirical evidence from Chinese enterprises[J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2014, 34:78-98. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.11.001
[17]	Long X L, Chen Y Q, Du J G, et al. The effect of environmental innovation behavior on economic and environmental performance of 182 Chinese firms[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 166:1274-1282. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.070
[18]	Dangelico R M, Pontrandolfo P. Being ‘Green and Competitive’: The impact of environmental actions and collaborations on firm performance[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2013, 24(6):413-430. doi: 10.1002/bse.v24.6
[19]	Reinhardt F. Market failure and the environmental policies of firms’ economic rationales for beyond compliance behavior[J]. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2010, 3(1):9-21. doi: 10.1162/108819899569368
[20]	Marin G. Do eco-innovations harm productivity growth through crowding out? Results of an extended CDM model for Italy[J]. Research Policy, 2014, 43(2):301-317. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.015
[21]	Lin R J, Tan K H, Geng Y. Market demand, green product innovation, and firm performance: Evidence from Vietnam motorcycle industry[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 40:101-107. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.001
[22]	Oke A. Innovation types and innovation management practices in service companies[J]. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2007, 27(6):564-587.
[23]	Li D Y, Zheng M, Cao C C, et al. The impact of legitimacy pressure and corporate profitability on green innovation: Evidence from China top 100[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 141:41-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.123
[24]	Kam-Sing W S. The influence of green product competitiveness on the success of green product innovation[J]. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2012, 15(4):468-490. doi: 10.1108/14601061211272385
[25]	曲峰庚, 董宇鸿. 绿色创新:新经济时代企业成长动力[M]. 北京: 经济科学出版社, 2013.
	[ Qu F G, Dong Y H. Green Innovation: The Driving Force of Enterprise Growth in the New Economic Era[M]. Beijing: Economic Science Press, 2013.]
[26]	Qiu L, Jie X W, Wang Y A, et al. Green product innovation, green dynamic capability, and competitive advantage: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing enterprises[J]. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 2020, 27(1):146-165. doi: 10.1002/csr.v27.1
[27]	Boons F, Wagner M. Assessing the relationship between economic and ecological performance: Distinguishing system levels and the role of innovation[J]. Ecological Economics, 2009, DOI: 10.1002/csr.1780. doi: 10.1002/csr.1780
[28]	刘贝贝, 左其亭, 刁艺璇. 绿色科技创新在黄河流域生态保护和高质量发展中的价值体现及实现路径[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(2):423-432.
	[ Liu B B, Zuo Q T, Diao Y X. The value and pathways of green technology innovation for ecological conservation and high-quality development of the Yellow River Basin[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(2):423-432.]
[29]	Chesbrough H, Lim K, Ruan Y. Open innovation and patterns of R&D competition[J]. International Journal of Technology Management, 2007, 52(3):295-321. doi: 10.1504/IJTM.2010.035978
[30]	Porter M E, Linde C V D. Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship[J]. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1995, 9(4):97-118. doi: 10.1257/jep.9.4.97
[31]	Singjai K, Winata L, Kummer T F. Green initiatives and their competitive advantage for the hotel industry in developing countries[J]. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2018, 75:131-143. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.03.007
[32]	Tu Y, Wu W K. How does green innovation improve enterprises’ competitive advantage? The role of organizational learning[J]. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 2020, 26(2):504-516. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.12.031
[33]	Reinhardt, Forest. Market failure and the environmental policies of firms’ economic rationales for beyond compliance behavior[J]. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2010, 3(1):9-21. doi: 10.1162/108819899569368
[34]	Shan S, Gen S Y, Kamran H W, et al. Role of green technology innovation and renewable energy in carbon neutrality: A sustainable investigation from Turkey[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2021, DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113004. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113004
[35]	Chen Y S. The driver of green innovation and green image: Green core competence[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2008, 81(3):531-543. doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9522-1
[36]	Yook K H, Choi J H, Suresh N C. Linking green purchasing capabilities to environmental and economic performance: The moderating role of firm size[J]. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 2018, 24(4):326-337. doi: 10.1016/j.pursup.2017.09.001
[37]	Nishitani K, Jannah N, Kaneko S, et al. Does corporate environmental performance enhance financial performance? An empirical study of indonesian firms[J]. Environmental Development, 2017, 23:10-21. doi: 10.1016/j.envdev.2017.06.003
[38]	Wang M Y, Cheng Z X, Li Y M, et al. Impact of market regulation on economic and environmental performance: A game model of endogenous green technological innovation[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123969. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123969
[39]	Zhang Y, Wang J R, Xue Y J, et al. Impact of environmental regulations on green technological innovative behavior: An empirical study in China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 188:763-773. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.013
[40]	Triguero A, Moreno-Mondéjar L, Davia M A. Drivers of different types of eco-innovation in European SMEs[J]. Ecological Economics, 2013, 92:25-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.009
[41]	Damanpour F. An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations[J]. British Journal of Management, 2010, 21(4):996-1010. doi: 10.1111/bjom.2010.21.issue-4
[42]	Tang M F, Walsh G, Lerner D, et al. Green innovation, managerial concern and firm performance: An empirical study[J]. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2018, 27(1):39-51. doi: 10.1002/bse.v27.1
[43]	Ar, Murat I. The impact of green product innovation on firm performance and competitive capability: The moderating role of managerial environmental concern[J]. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2012, 62(1):854-864. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.144
[44]	Huang X X, Hu Z P, Liu C S, et al. The relationships between regulatory and customer pressure, green organizational responses, and green innovation performance[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 112:3423-3433. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.106

构念	题项	因子载荷	组合信度	平均变抽取（AVE）	Cronbach’s α
EGT	EGT₁	0.831	0.916	0.685	0.885
	EGT₂	0.847
	EGT₃	0.828
	EGT₄	0.801
	EGT₅	0.831
PGT	PGT₁	0.799	0.901	0.646	0.863
	PGT₂	0.830
	PGT₃	0.808
	PGT₄	0.776
	PGT₅	0.806
GPI	GPI₁	0.777	0.893	0.677	0.836
	GPI₂	0.807
	GPI₃	0.806
	GPI₄	0.896
GEP	GEP₁	0.815	0.899	0.639	0.859
	GEP₂	0.805
	GEP₃	0.783
	GEP₄	0.794
	GEP₅	0.801
MCP	MCP₁	0.831	0.931	0.730	0.907
	MCP₂	0.820
	MCP₃	0.933
	MCP₄	0.847
	MCP₅	0.835
GFP	GFP₁	0.831	0.895	0.632	0.854
	GFP₂	0.763
	GFP₃	0.804
	GFP₄	0.803
	GFP₅	0.771

变量	AVE	STE	EGT	PGT	GPI	GEP	MCP	GFP
EGT	5.400	0.698	0.828
PGT	5.504	0.771	0.472**	0.804
GPI	5.481	0.830	0.345**	0.482**	0.823
GEP	5.506	0.770	0.479**	0.471**	0.410**	0.799
MCP	5.126	0.895	0.421**	0.423**	0.359**	0.454**	0.854
GFP	4.949	0.918	0.322**	0.388**	0.283**	0.427**	0.614**	0.795

变量	绿色工艺创新	绿色产品创新	企业环境绩效	企业市场竞争力	企业经济绩效
变量	模型1	模型2	模型3	模型4	模型5
常数项	2.533***	2.256***	1.575***	0.589	2.434***
自变量
末端治理技术创新	0.514***	0.466***	0.338***	0.204***	-0.034
绿色工艺创新		0.177***	0.233***	0.187***	0.142**
绿色产品创新			0.179***	0.120**	-0.019
企业环境绩效				0.292***	0.200***
企业市场竞争力					0.496***
控制变量
企业年龄	0.028	-0.044	-0.013	-0.006	-0.020
企业规模	0.009	-0.043	-0.021	0.025	-0.025
员工结构	-0.020	0.035	-0.042	0.106***	0.070*
营业收入	0.033	0.003	0.018	0.033	0.028
检验值
R²	0.228	0.256	0.339	0.330	0.423
F值	37.568***	36.350***	46.413***	41.270***	51.446***

路径效应	估计值	标准误	LLCI	ULCI
总效应	0.386	0.049	0.290	0.483
直接效应	-0.034	0.049	-0.131	0.062
总间接效应	0.420	0.042	0.342	0.505
特定间接路径
Ind 01：EGT→PGT→GFP	0.073	0.030	0.015	0.133
Ind 02：EGT→GPI→GFP	-0.003	0.009	-0.022	0.012
Ind 03：EGT→GEP→GFP	0.067	0.019	0.032	0.107
Ind 04：EGT→MCP→GFP	0.101	0.027	0.049	0.155
Ind 05：EGT→PGT→GPI→GFP	-0.004	0.011	-0.026	0.016
Ind 06：EGT→PGT→GEP→GFP	0.024	0.009	0.010	0.044
Ind 07：EGT→PGT→MCP→GFP	0.048	0.016	0.018	0.081
Ind 08：EGT→GPI→GEP→GFP	0.006	0.003	0.002	0.013
Ind 09：EGT→GPI→MCP→GFP	0.011	0.005	0.002	0.023
Ind 10：EGT→GEP→MCP→GFP	0.049	0.013	0.027	0.079
Ind 11：EGT→PGT→GPI→GEP→GFP	0.008	0.003	0.003	0.016
Ind 12：EGT→PGT→GPI→MCP→GFP	0.014	0.006	0.003	0.026
Ind 13：EGT→PGT→GEP→MCP→GFP	0.017	0.006	0.008	0.031
Ind 14：EGT→GPI→GEP→MCP→GFP	0.005	0.002	0.002	0.009
Ind 15：EGT→PGT→GPI→GEP→MCP→GFP	0.006	0.002	0.003	0.010

路径比较	估计值	标准误	LLCI	ULCI	路径比较	估计值	标准误	LLCI	ULCI
Ind 01-Ind 08	0.067	0.030	0.009	0.127	Ind 04-Ind 14	0.096	0.027	0.044	0.151
Ind 01-Ind 09	0.063	0.031	0.004	0.123	Ind 04-Ind 15	0.095	0.027	0.044	0.149
Ind 01-Ind 11	0.065	0.031	0.006	0.125	Ind 06-Ind 08	0.018	0.009	0.004	0.038
Ind 01-Ind 14	0.069	0.030	0.011	0.128	Ind 06-Ind 11	0.016	0.008	0.003	0.035
Ind 01-Ind 15	0.067	0.030	0.009	0.127	Ind 06-Ind 14	0.019	0.009	0.003	0.040
Ind 03-Ind 06	0.044	0.016	0.015	0.078	Ind 06-Ind 15	0.018	0.009	0.003	0.039
Ind 03-Ind 08	0.061	0.018	0.028	0.098	Ind 07-Ind 08	0.041	0.016	0.011	0.074
Ind 03-Ind 09	0.057	0.020	0.019	0.096	Ind 07-Ind 09	0.037	0.017	0.005	0.073
Ind 03-Ind 11	0.059	0.018	0.027	0.095	Ind 07-Ind 11	0.039	0.016	0.008	0.073
Ind 03-Ind 12	0.054	0.020	0.015	0.094	Ind 07-Ind 14	0.043	0.016	0.013	0.076
Ind 03-Ind 13	0.050	0.021	0.010	0.092	Ind 07-Ind 15	0.042	0.016	0.012	0.075
Ind 03-Ind 14	0.063	0.019	0.027	0.102	Ind 10-Ind 11	0.041	0.014	0.016	0.073
Ind 03-Ind 15	0.062	0.019	0.025	0.101	Ind 10-Ind 12	0.035	0.014	0.011	0.066
Ind 04-Ind 06	0.077	0.028	0.022	0.133	Ind 10-Ind 13	0.032	0.012	0.012	0.057
Ind 04-Ind 08	0.095	0.027	0.044	0.149	Ind 10-Ind 14	0.044	0.013	0.023	0.073
Ind 04-Ind 09	0.091	0.028	0.034	0.147	Ind 10-Ind 15	0.043	0.013	0.023	0.072
Ind 04-Ind 11	0.093	0.026	0.041	0.146	Ind 13-Ind 15	0.013	0.006	0.003	0.026
Ind 04-Ind 12	0.087	0.028	0.031	0.143	Ind 14-Ind 15	0.011	0.006	0.002	0.025
Ind 04-Ind 13	0.084	0.028	0.028	0.139