Environmental regulation and investment: evidence from European industries
In: Working papers in economics and statistics 2009,04
8 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Working papers in economics and statistics 2009,04
In this paper we examine determinants of prepaid modes of health care financing in a worldwide cross-country perspective. We use three different indicators to capture the role of prepaid modes in health care financing: (i) the share of total prepaid financing as percent of total current health expenditures, (ii) the share of voluntary prepaid financing as percent of total prepaid financing, and (iii) the share of compulsory health insurance as percent of total compulsory prepaid financing. In the econometric analysis, we refer to a panel data set comprising 154 countries and covering the time period 2000–2015. We apply a static as well as a dynamic panel data model. We find that the current structure of prepaid financing is significantly determined by its different forms in the past. The significant influence of GDP per capita, governmental revenues, the agricultural value added, development assistance for health, degree of urbanization and regulatory quality varies depending on the financing structure we look at. The share of the elderly and the education level are only of minor importance for explaining the variation in a country's share of prepaid health care financing. The importance of the mentioned variables as determinants for prepaid health care financing also varies depending on the countries' socio-economic development. From our analysis we conclude that more detailed information on indicators which reflect the distribution of individual characteristics (such as income, family size and structure and health risks) within a country's population would be needed to gain deeper insight into the decisive determinants for prepaid health care financing.
BASE
In this paper we examine determinants of prepaid modes of health care financing in a worldwide cross-country perspective. We use three different indicators to capture the role of prepaid modes in health care financing: (i) the share of total prepaid financing as percent of total current health expenditures, (ii) the share of voluntary prepaid financing as percent of total prepaid financing, and (iii) the share of compulsory health insurance as percent of total compulsory financing arrangements. We refer to a panel data set comprising 158 countries and covering the time period 2000-2015. We apply a static as well as a dynamic panel data model. We find that the current structure of prepaid financing is significantly determined by its different forms in the past. The significant influence of governmental revenues, development assistance for health and regulatory quality varies depending on the financing structure we look at. The country's GDP per capita, the agricultural value added, the degree of urbanization and the share of the elderly are only of minor importance for explaining the variation in a country's structure of health care financing. From our analysis we conclude that more detailed information on indicators which reflect the distribution of individual characteristics (such as income and health risks) within a country's population would be needed to gain deeper insight into the decisive determinants for prepaid health care financing.
BASE
In: Environmental and resource economics, Band 42, Heft 2, S. 169-186
ISSN: 1573-1502
In: The World Economy, Band 41, Heft 11, S. 3098-3129
SSRN
In: Environmental and resource economics, Band 43, Heft 3, S. 333-350
ISSN: 1573-1502
This paper contributes to the empirical literature on the relationship between environmental regulation and firm behavior. In particular, we ask whether and how strongly investment decisions of firms respond to stringency in environmental regulation. Environmental stringency is measured as (i) an industry's total current expenditure on environmental protection, and (ii) a country's revenue from environmental taxes. Focusing on European industry level data between 1995 and 2005, we estimate the differential impact of environmental stringency on four types of investment: gross investment in tangible goods, in new buildings, in machinery, and in `productive' investment (investment in tangible goods minus investment in abatement technologies). Both environmental variables enter positively, and their quadratic terms exhibit significantly negative parameter estimates. This, in turn, indicates a positive but diminishing impact of environmental regulation on investment.
BASE
In: Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Band 10, Heft 1, S. 104-119
SSRN