Climate change affectedness and innovation in firms
气候变化的影响和企业创新

C25  C25 系列
C21  C21 系列
O31
Q54  问 54
Q55  问 55
Keywords:  关键字：
Climate change  气候变化
Economic consequences  经济后果
Eco-innovation  生态创新
Community Innovation Survey
社区创新调查
Probit regression  概率回归
Treatment effect model  治疗效果模型

Climate change increases the risk of extreme weather events including hurricanes, heavy rain and flooding, more frequent heat waves, extreme cold, and longer droughts (Winn et al., 2011). These shifts in planetary conditions are likely to affect business activities in many ways. Direct impacts relate to the disruption of production, transport and communication, while indirect effects may relate to changes in prices for inputs and changes in demand towards products with fewer adverse impact on the climate. In addition, governments started to combat climate change by imposing more stringent regulations on greenhouse gas emissions and accelerating a shift from fossil to renewable energy production, which affects business activities too (OECD, 2022).
气候变化增加了极端天气事件的风险，包括飓风、暴雨和洪水、更频繁的热浪、极寒和更长时间的干旱（Winn 等人，2011 年）。地球状况的这些变化可能会以多种方式影响商业活动。直接影响与生产、运输和通信的中断有关，而间接影响可能与投入品价格的变化和对气候不利影响较小的产品的需求变化有关。此外，政府开始通过对温室气体排放实施更严格的法规并加速从化石能源生产转向可再生能源生产来应对气候变化，这也影响了商业活动（经合组织，2022 年）。

The various economic consequences of climate change can affect firms in many ways and may urge firms to adopt to a changing situation. In this context, it is not climate change as a natural phenomenon as such (e.g. shifts in planetary conditions such as changes in temperature, rainfall, airflow) that drives firm behavior, but changes in costs, business opportunities and other compliance to regulation. One way of adoption is to innovate, i.e. to change products and processes in a way that they fit better to the new situation. This may lead to a re-direction of business
气候变化的各种经济后果会以多种方式影响公司，并可能促使公司适应不断变化的情况。在这种情况下，推动企业行为的不是气候变化本身的自然现象（例如温度、降雨量、气流变化等地球条件的变化），而是成本、商业机会和其他法规合规性的变化。采用的一种方式是创新，即以更适合新情况的方式改变产品和流程。这可能会导致业务重新定位
innovation activities from ‘traditional’ innovations to ‘eco-innovations’ (Acemoglu et al., 2012). A stronger focus on eco-innovations is likely to support the adoption process towards climate-adapted economic activities. However, this may lead to a crowding-out of ‘traditional’ innovations, which typically focus on improving performance characteristics of products and processes that result in higher productivity and/or user value. Fewer ‘traditional’ innovations may lower the contribution of innovation to increases in productivity, economic growth and wealth, hence limiting the resources needed for combating climate change.
创新活动从“传统”创新到“生态创新”（Acemoglu et al.， 2012）。更加关注生态创新可能会支持采用气候适应型经济活动的进程。然而，这可能会导致“传统”创新的挤出，这些创新通常侧重于改善产品和流程的性能特征，从而提高生产力和/或用户价值。较少的“传统”创新可能会降低创新对提高生产力、经济增长和财富的贡献，从而限制应对气候变化所需的资源。

In this paper, we aim to investigate how the different economic consequences of climate change affect innovation activities in firms. On the one hand, government regulation, demand shifts and cost increases are likely to result in higher efforts to make the product portfolio and the production processes of firms more ‘climate-friendly’, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, offering products with a lower ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} footprint, and re-arranging production in response to direct or indirect cost increases from climate change. In the light of the ‘re-direction’ literature (Acemoglu et al., 2012), there may be wider impacts of climate change on the entire innovation strategies of firms in order to shift from ‘dirty’ to ‘clean’ inputs. On the other hand, such eco-innovation activities may crowd-out other innovations, with potential adverse effects on
在本文中，我们旨在研究气候变化的不同经济后果如何影响公司的创新活动。一方面，政府监管、需求变化和成本增加可能会导致企业付出更大的努力，通过减少温室气体排放、提供足迹更低的 ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} 产品以及重新安排生产以应对气候变化造成的直接或间接成本增加，使公司的产品组合和生产过程更加“气候友好”。根据“重定向”文献（Acemoglu et al.， 2012），气候变化可能会对企业的整个创新战略产生更广泛的影响，以便从“肮脏”的投入转变为“干净的”投入。另一方面，此类生态创新活动可能会排挤其他创新，从而对

productivity and the generation of new technologies.
生产力和新技术的产生。
The empirical analysis uses data from the German part of the European Commission’s Community Innovation Survey (CIS) and employs probit and treatment effect models. We rely on a measure for the affectedness of firms by climate change that has been newly developed by the Statistical Office of the EU (Eurostat) and the authors of this paper and was first implemented for the CIS reporting year 2020 (CIS 2020). A main advantage of this measure is that it covers different types of economic consequences of climate change through the same metric, enabling a comparative analysis for each mechanism. A key disadvantage is that the measure is based on the assessment of managers on the importance of different economic consequences that can be attributed to climate change. This results in a certain level of subjectivity, which certainly limits the conclusions that can be made from our analysis. Keeping this in mind, our key finding is that (perceived) climate change affectedness is positively linked to both eco-innovations and other (noneco) innovations, albeit the effect on other innovations is lower. This result suggests that the economic consequences of climate change slightly shift innovation activities towards eco-innovation, but do not crowd-out non-eco-innovations.
实证分析使用来自欧盟委员会社区创新调查 （CIS） 德国部分的数据，并采用概率和处理效果模型。我们依赖于欧盟统计局 （Eurostat） 和本文作者新制定的气候变化对企业影响的衡量标准，该衡量标准首次在 2020 年独联体报告年度 （CIS 2020） 中实施。该指标的一个主要优点是，它通过相同的指标涵盖了气候变化的不同类型的经济后果，从而能够对每种机制进行比较分析。一个关键的缺点是，该衡量标准是基于管理人员对可归因于气候变化的不同经济后果重要性的评估。这导致了一定程度的主观性，这无疑限制了我们分析可以得出的结论。牢记这一点，我们的主要发现是，（感知的）气候变化影响与生态创新和其他（非生态）创新呈正相关，尽管对其他创新的影响较低。这一结果表明，气候变化的经济后果略微将创新活动转向生态创新，但并未排挤非生态创新。

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the innovation effects of climate change affectedness from a theoretical background and gives a short overview of the already existing empirical literature. Section 3 presents the research design and the data basis and reports descriptive results. The results of the econometric analyses are shown in Section 4. Section 5 discusses the key findings of our analyses.
本文的组织结构如下。第 2 节从理论背景讨论了气候变化影响的创新效应，并简要概述了现有的实证文献。第 3 部分介绍了研究设计和数据基础，并报告了描述性结果。计量经济学分析的结果显示在第 4 节中。第 5 节讨论了我们分析的主要发现。

In this paper, we conceptualize the likely impacts of climate change on innovation in the following way. First, we consider climate change as a natural phenomenon that describes certain shifts in planetary conditions with respect to temperature, rainfall and airflow. These shifts can affect business activities in various ways. Secondly, it is these economic consequences of climate change that change the behavior of firms. We call the extent to which a firm is affected by such economic consequences ‘climate change affectedness’. Thirdly, changes in firm behavior due to different levels of climate change affectedness may include adaptations in the way a firm innovates. We distinguish two main categories of innovation, eco-innovation and non-eco-innovation. Ecoinnovation is defined as new or improved products or processes that reduce environmental pressure resulting from a firm’s business activities or the use of its products (see Kemp et al., 2019). Non-eco-innovation include all other innovations (applying the Oslo Manual definition of innovation, see OECD and Eurostat, 2018).
在本文中，我们通过以下方式概念化了气候变化对创新的可能影响。首先，我们将气候变化视为一种自然现象，它描述了地球条件在温度、降雨和气流方面的某些变化。这些转变会以各种方式影响业务活动。其次，正是气候变化的这些经济后果改变了公司的行为。我们将公司受此类经济后果影响的程度称为“气候变化影响”。第三，由于气候变化影响程度的不同程度而导致的公司行为变化可能包括公司创新方式的适应。我们区分了两大类创新，即生态创新和非生态创新。生态创新被定义为新的或改进的产品或流程，以减少公司业务活动或使用其产品造成的环境压力（参见 Kemp 等人，2019 年）。非生态创新包括所有其他创新（应用《奥斯陆手册》对创新的定义，见经合组织和欧盟统计局，2018 年）。

From a firm perspective, business operations may be affected by climate change in different ways. In the literature, both negative and positive economic consequences have been identified (Winn et al., 2011; Berkhout et al., 2006; Linnenluecke et al., 2013). On the negative side, extreme weather conditions can directly disrupt business operations. Climate change is also likely to increase many operational costs of firms, e.g., through higher prices for inputs, transport and communication, insurance and financing. In addition, government actions to combat climate change are also likely to increase costs and compliance efforts of firms. On the positive side, at least some firms may also benefit from climate change as demand for more climate-friendly products is likely to increase, providing incentives to develop and commercialize such products. In addition, adapting social and economic activities to climate change offers a wide range of new business opportunities, from renewable energy production to technologies to cope with changed climate conditions (e.g., in housing, transport, agriculture).
从公司的角度来看，企业运营可能会以不同的方式受到气候变化的影响。在文献中，已经确定了消极和积极的经济后果（Winn 等人，2011 年;Berkhout 等人，2006 年;Linnenluecke et al.， 2013）。从消极的一面来看，极端天气条件会直接扰乱业务运营。气候变化还可能增加企业的许多运营成本，例如，通过提高投入品、运输和通信、保险和融资的价格。此外，政府应对气候变化的行动也可能会增加公司的成本和合规工作。从积极的一面来看，至少一些公司也可能从气候变化中受益，因为对更气候友好型产品的需求可能会增加，从而激励开发和商业化此类产品。此外，使社会和经济活动适应气候变化提供了广泛的新商机，从可再生能源生产到应对气候变化条件的技术（例如，住房、交通、农业）。

For this paper, we distinguish four types of economic consequences of climate change: First, disruption of business activities due to extreme
在本文中，我们区分了气候变化的四种经济后果：第一，极端造成的商业活动中断
weather conditions and weather-related natural disasters (Rivera et al., 2022). Secondly, higher cost of production and delivery of goods and services resulting from higher cost for inputs, transport, supply-chain reorganization, insurance or financing (Krueger et al., 2020). Thirdly, complying with government regulations to combat climate change, such as lowering greenhouse gas emissions or replacing fossil energy sources by renewable ones (Baz et al., 2022). Fourthly, new business opportunities that arise from demand shifts towards climate-friendly products (Boström and Klintman, 2019) and products needed to adapt to climate change.
天气状况和与天气相关的自然灾害（Rivera 等人，2022 年）。其次，由于投入、运输、供应链重组、保险或融资成本较高，导致商品和服务的生产和交付成本更高（Krueger et al.， 2020）。第三，遵守政府应对气候变化的法规，例如降低温室气体排放或用可再生能源取代化石能源（Baz 等人，2022 年）。第四，需求产生的新商机转向气候友好型产品（Boström 和 Klintman，2019 年）和适应气候变化所需的产品。

The most immediate consequences may result from more extreme weather events caused by climate change, e.g. floods, droughts, storms or extreme cold (Winn et al., 2011). Extreme weather conditions can directly impact operations of firms by damaging facilities, restricting or stopping production, or complicating or impeding transportation. That such impacts materialize in adverse firm performance can be seen from the following quotation from a company report: “Partially offsetting the impact of higher prices was a decrease in sales volume of approximately $8\mathrm{\%}$$8\mathrm{\%}$8%8 \% in the year ended December 31, 2018 as compared to the same period in 2017 as volumes were adversely impacted by persistently low water levels on the Rhine due to hot weather conditions. This led to constrained volumes and logistical restrictions within inland Europe which adversely impacted the operation rates of the Koln polymer and olefin assets.” (Ineos Group Holdings, 2018: 54). Climate change may also jeopardize entire production systems in certain sectors that rely on relatively narrowly confined temperature and seasonal conditions, including agriculture and tourism (Winn et al., 2011: 160).
最直接的后果可能是气候变化引起的更多极端天气事件，例如洪水、干旱、风暴或极端寒冷（Winn et al.， 2011）。极端天气条件会损坏设施、限制或停止生产，或者使运输复杂化或阻碍，从而直接影响公司的运营。从公司报告的以下引述中可以看出，这种影响会体现在不利的公司业绩中：“与 2017 年同期相比，截至 2018 年 12 月 31 日的一年的销量下降了大约 $8\mathrm{\%}$$8\mathrm{\%}$8%8 \% ，部分抵消了价格上涨的影响，因为天气炎热，莱茵河持续低水位对销量产生了不利影响。这导致欧洲内陆的产量受限和物流限制，从而对 Koln 聚合物和烯烃资产的运营率产生了不利影响。（英力士集团控股，2018：54）。气候变化还可能危及某些部门的整个生产系统，这些部门依赖于相对狭窄的温度和季节性条件，包括农业和旅游业（Winn 等人，2011：160）。

In addition to these direct impacts, climate change may urge firms to adopt their business activities in various ways, from more resilient production and distribution methods that can cope with more extreme weather conditions to organizational changes (Berkhout et al., 2006) and the development of new business models (Linnenluecke et al., 2013). Disruptions of business activities caused by climate change are also likely to result in increasing prices for products and services affected by these changes. These price changes will convert into higher input prices for other companies and may represent an indirect effect of climate change that affects a large number of sectors and businesses that do not experience climate change consequences directly. There are also likely impacts on the cost of financing in case a firm’s climate change exposure increases (Krueger et al., 2020). Climate change may also require a long-term re-organizing of production and distribution, e.g., if inland waterway transport is interfered by too low water levels. All in all, extreme weather conditions caused by climate change will lead to higher costs for the whole economy (Oberpriller et al., 2021).
除了这些直接影响之外，气候变化还可能促使公司以各种方式开展其商业活动，从能够应对更多极端天气条件的更具弹性的生产和分销方法，到组织变革（Berkhout et al.， 2006）和开发新的商业模式（Linnenluecke et al.， 2013）。气候变化造成的商业活动中断也可能导致受这些变化影响的产品和服务的价格上涨。这些价格变化将转化为其他公司更高的投入价格，并可能代表气候变化的间接影响，影响到大量没有直接经历气候变化影响的行业和企业。如果公司的气候变化风险增加，也可能对融资成本产生影响（Krueger et al.， 2020）。气候变化还可能需要对生产和分配进行长期的重组，例如，如果内河运输受到过低水位的干扰。总而言之，气候变化引起的极端天气条件将导致整个经济的成本更高（Oberpriller 等人，2021 年）。

Other economic consequences of climate change relate to government actions taken to mitigate climate change. These actions include regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the introduction of a greenhouse gas emission trading system (Haites, 2018), the introduction of new standards for climate-neutral activities (Dalhammar and Richter, 2019), taxes on activities with negative climate impacts, new reporting requirements on firms on how they respond to climate change challenges (Tang and Demeritt, 2018) or regulations on energy efficiency or replacing fossil by renewable energies. These policy measures, too, will lead to higher input and product prices in an economy.
气候变化的其他经济后果与政府为缓解气候变化而采取的行动有关。这些行动包括减少温室气体排放的法规和引入温室气体排放交易系统（Haites，2018 年）、引入气候中和活动的新标准（Dalhammar 和 Richter，2019 年）、对具有负面气候影响的活动征税、对公司如何应对气候变化挑战的新报告要求（Tang 和 Demeritt， 2018 年）或关于能源效率或用可再生能源替代化石燃料的法规。这些政策措施也将导致一个经济体的投入品和产品价格上涨。

Another indirect way of climate change impacts are changes in customer preferences that result from climate change (Berkhout et al., 2006). Such alterations in demand may range from low-carbon products (i.e. products that are produced and/or consumed with producing little or no greenhouse gas emissions) to requiring a comprehensive carbonneutral approach from companies. These demand changes might lead to higher product prices but, on the other hand, they might also trigger product and process related environmental innovations.
气候变化影响的另一种间接方式是气候变化导致客户偏好的变化（Berkhout et al.， 2006）。这种需求的变化可能从低碳产品（即生产和/或消费时产生少量或没有温室气体排放的产品）到要求公司采取全面的碳中和方法。这些需求变化可能会导致产品价格上涨，但另一方面，它们也可能引发与产品和流程相关的环境创新。

These changes in the business environment require firms to cope with the new situation, and to adapt their business activities (Wittneben and Kiyar, 2009). One way of adaptation is to reduce the firm’s own negative environmental impact by redesigning products and processes
商业环境的这些变化要求公司应对新形势，并调整其商业活动（Wittneben 和 Kiyar，2009 年）。一种适应方法是通过重新设计产品和流程来减少公司自身对环境的负面影响
to become more ‘greener’. One key research question of this paper is whether and how the different types of climate change affectedness lead to such ‘eco-innovations’. Another research question is whether more eco-innovations crowd-out other innovations, such as new technology that improves general performance characteristics of products and processes, which typically result in higher productivity.
变得更“环保”。本文的一个关键研究问题是不同类型的气候变化影响是否以及如何导致这种“生态创新”。另一个研究问题是，更多的生态创新是否会排挤其他创新，例如改善产品和流程一般性能特征的新技术，这通常会导致更高的生产力。

From a theoretical background, eco-innovations show specificities compared to other innovations due to the so-called “double externality” problem (Rennings, 2000; Horbach, 2019). In addition to knowledge externalities, which are common to all types of innovations, ecoinnovations also produce positive environmental externalities by reducing environmental pressure. As a result, private returns from ecoinnovations are particularly low compared to their social returns, leading to under-investment in this type of innovation (Popp et al., 2010). Environmental policy measures are often used to correct these market failures. In many cases, these policy measures increase the costs for environmental inputs so that it pays off to realize eco-innovations at least in the long run. There is an extensive theoretical and empirical literature on this “induced innovation” hypothesis (Jaffe et al., 2003; Jakeman et al., 2004; Popp et al., 2010), and which type of environmental policy instruments, such as command and control versus marketbased measures, are most effective to create eco-innovations (Johnstone et al., 2010). Popp (2019) provides an overview on research on the relationship of environmental policy and innovation and concludes that emission taxes and tradeable emission permits seem to have considerable effects on innovation activities. The Porter hypothesis (Porter and van der Linde, 1995) suggests that well-designed environmental regulation may even lead to a win-win situation by reducing pollution and increasing profits (Rexhäuser and Rammer, 2014). In addition to environmental policies, a number of further determinants of eco-innovation have been identified, including demand for environmental-friendly products and the motivation to save costs (see e.g. Brunnermeier and Cohen, 2003, Horbach, 2008, Johnstone et al., 2010, Demirel and Kesidou, 2011, Horbach et al., 2012, Del Río et al., 2016, Lanoie et al., 2011, Malen and Marcus, 2017, Horbach, 2019 for an overview).
从理论背景来看，由于所谓的“双重外部性”问题，与其他创新相比，生态创新显示出特殊性（Rennings，2000 年;Horbach，2019 年）。除了所有类型创新所共有的知识外部性外，生态创新还通过减少环境压力来产生积极的环境外部性。因此，与社会回报相比，生态创新的私人回报特别低，导致对此类创新的投资不足（Popp et al.， 2010）。环境政策措施通常用于纠正这些市场失灵。在许多情况下，这些政策措施增加了环境投入的成本，因此至少从长远来看，实现生态创新是值得的。关于这种“诱导创新”假说，有大量的理论和实证文献（Jaffe et al.， 2003;Jakeman 等人，2004 年;Popp et al.， 2010），以及哪种类型的环境政策工具，如命令和控制与市场化措施，对创造生态创新最有效（Johnstone et al.， 2010）。Popp （2019） 概述了环境政策与创新关系的研究，并得出结论，排放税和可交易排放许可证似乎对创新活动有相当大的影响。波特假说（Porter 和 van der Linde，1995 年）表明，精心设计的环境监管甚至可以通过减少污染和增加利润来带来双赢（Rexhäuser 和 Rammer，2014 年）。 除了环境政策之外，还确定了生态创新的一些进一步决定因素，包括对环保产品的需求和节省成本的动机（参见 Brunnermeier 和 Cohen，2003 年，Horbach，2008 年，Johnstone 等人，2010 年，Demirel 和 Kesidou，2011 年，Horbach 等人，2012 年，Del Río 等人，2016 年，Lanoie 等人，2011 年，Malen 和 Marcus， 2017 年，Horbach，2019 年概述）。

Compared to the literature on the determinants of eco-innovations, the literature on the specific effects of climate change related factors for (eco)-innovation is quite scarce (Linnenluecke et al., 2013). In a recent paper, von Schickfus (2021: VI) shows that there may be “… a nonzero relationship between the importance of climate issues in firms, and firms’ green innovation activities”. The author uses green patenting as eco-innovation indicator and exposure to a climate-related shock to measure climate change affectedness. Penna and Geels (2015) analyze the impact of climate change on the U.S. car industry from 1979 to 2012. The authors analyze “… the dynamics of the climate change problem in terms of socio-political mobilization by social movements, scientists, wider publics and policymakers” (Penna and Geels, 2015: 1029). They find that the reorientation of the U.S. car industry towards low-carbon technologies was quite slow apparently due to only weak external pressures during the considered time-period. Miao and Popp (2014) analyze the effects of natural disasters such as earthquakes, flooding, and drought on innovation. Using patent data from 1974 to 2009 the authors find a significant impact of damage caused by natural disasters on innovation activities. For the case of U.S. ski resorts, Rivera and Clement (2019) show that nature adversity intensity is positively correlated to higher levels of adaptation activities.
与关于生态创新决定因素的文献相比，关于气候变化相关因素对（生态）创新的具体影响的文献相当稀少（Linnenluecke et al.， 2013）。在最近的一篇论文中，von Schickfus （2021： VI） 表明可能存在“......气候问题在公司中的重要性与公司的绿色创新活动之间存在非零关系”。作者使用绿色专利作为生态创新指标，并暴露于气候相关冲击中来衡量气候变化的影响程度。Penna 和 Geels （2015） 分析了 1979 年至 2012 年气候变化对美国汽车行业的影响。作者分析道：“......气候变化问题在社会运动、科学家、更广泛的公众和政策制定者进行社会政治动员方面的动态“（Penna 和 Geels，2015：1029）。他们发现，美国汽车工业向低碳技术的重新定位相当缓慢，这显然是由于在所考虑的时间段内外部压力微弱。Miao 和 Popp （2014） 分析了地震、洪水和干旱等自然灾害对创新的影响。使用 1974 年至 2009 年的专利数据，作者发现自然灾害造成的损害对创新活动有重大影响。以美国滑雪胜地为例，Rivera 和 Clement （2019） 表明，自然逆境强度与更高水平的适应活动呈正相关。

Another stream of literature looked at the role for specific government regulations to limit climate change, such as carbon pricing. Lilliestam et al. (2021) review 19 empirical papers on the effects of carbon pricing on innovation and zero-carbon investment. They restrict their overview on relatively ambitious carbon pricing systems because very low carbon prices might not have substantial effects, considering the ETS in the EU and New Zealand, and the carbon tax systems in British
另一组文献着眼于特定政府法规在限制气候变化方面的作用，例如碳定价。Lilliestam 等人（2021 年）回顾了 19 篇关于碳定价对创新和零碳投资影响的实证论文。他们限制了对相对雄心勃勃的碳定价体系的概述，因为考虑到欧盟和新西兰的碳排放交易体系以及英国的碳税体系，极低的碳价格可能不会产生实质性影响

Columbia, France, Switzerland, and four Nordic countries. The 19 papers cover a wide range of methods from qualitative approaches to quantitative analyses based on firm-level and country-level data. All in all, the authors conclude that the effects of carbon pricing on innovation are quite weak (Lilliestam et al., 2021). One reason for this result might be that many of the analyzed papers used data of the early phases of the ETS when the prices of the certificates were quite low. Quirion (2021) supports this view showing that the problem of over-allocation of permits occurred in nearly all emission trading systems. From a theoretical background, especially in the early transition phase from carbonintensive technologies to green ones, high price incentives are necessary to overcome lock-in effects in using carbon-intensive technologies, already existing networks and learning curve effects (Lilliestam et al., 2021). Calel and Dechezleprêtre (2016) investigate the impact of the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) on innovation activities based on a patent analysis. The authors find “… that the EU ETS has increased low-carbon innovation among regulated firms by as much as $10\mathrm{\%}$$10\mathrm{\%}$10%10 \%, while not crowding out patenting for other technologies. We also find evidence that the EU ETS has not affected patenting beyond the set of regulated companies. These results imply that the EU ETS accounts for nearly a 1% increase in European low-carbon patenting compared to a counterfactual scenario” (Calel and Dechezleprêtre, 2016: 173). Martin et al. (2016) provide a review of quantitative analyses and case studies on the impact of the EU ETS on the regulated firms. They conclude that there is robust evidence that the EU ETS caused partly an increase of eco-innovation activities in the second trade period of the ETS.
哥伦比亚、法国、瑞士和四个北欧国家。这 19 篇论文涵盖了从定性方法到基于公司层面和国家层面数据的定量分析的广泛方法。总而言之，作者得出的结论是，碳定价对创新的影响相当微弱（Lilliestam et al.， 2021）。造成这一结果的一个原因可能是，许多分析的论文使用了 ETS 早期阶段的数据，当时证书的价格相当低。Quirion （2021） 支持这一观点，表明几乎所有排放交易系统都存在许可证过度分配的问题。从理论背景来看，尤其是在从碳密集型技术到绿色技术的早期过渡阶段，高价格激励对于克服使用碳密集型技术的锁定效应、现有网络和学习曲线效应是必要的（Lilliestam et al.， 2021）。Calel 和 Dechezleprêtre （2016） 根据专利分析调查了欧盟排放交易体系 （EU ETS） 对创新活动的影响。作者发现“......欧盟排放交易体系 （EU ETS） 将受监管公司的低碳创新提高了多达 $10\mathrm{\%}$$10\mathrm{\%}$10%10 \% ，同时没有排挤其他技术的专利申请。我们还发现证据表明，欧盟 ETS 并未影响受监管公司以外的专利申请。这些结果表明，与反事实情景相比，欧盟 ETS 在欧洲低碳专利申请中增加了近 1%（Calel 和 Dechezleprêtre，2016：173）。Martin 等人（2016 年）对欧盟排放交易体系对受监管公司影响的定量分析和案例研究进行了回顾。 他们得出的结论是，有强有力的证据表明，欧盟 ETS 在一定程度上导致了 ETS 第二个贸易期生态创新活动的增加。

Joseph (2016) also detects a clear relationship between stringency of climate policy measures and innovation activities measured by the number of patents in Europe. His results show that an excess of the supply of certificates in the market, e.g., caused by an economic crisis, is correlated to a decrease in the number of patents. Dechezlepretre et al. (2020) also use international patent data for their analysis of innovation activities in technologies for climate change adaptation. The authors find a nearly doubling of the share of climate change mitigation technologies in total innovation from 1995 to 2015 but a stagnating development of climate change adaptation inventions. Borghesi et al. (2015) analyze sector-specific responses to climate and energy policy based on a qualitative analysis. They find out that “policies appear to be relevant in some sectors, namely energy, coke and refinery, and paper, but energy costs considerations dominate over the potential effects of ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} targeted policies” (Borghesi et al., 2015: 377).
Joseph （2016） 还发现气候政策措施的严格性与以欧洲专利数量衡量的创新活动之间存在明显关系。他的结果表明，市场上证书供应过多，例如由经济危机引起的，与专利数量的减少有关。Dechezlepretre 等人（2020 年）还使用国际专利数据来分析气候变化适应技术的创新活动。作者发现，从 1995 年到 2015 年，气候变化缓解技术在总创新中的份额几乎翻了一番，但气候变化适应发明的发展停滞不前。Borghesi 等人（2015 年）基于定性分析分析了特定行业对气候和能源政策的反应。他们发现，“政策似乎与某些行业相关，即能源、焦炭和炼油厂以及造纸业，但能源成本考虑主导了针对性政策的潜在 ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} 影响”（Borghesi 等人，2015：377）。

Based on the existing literature, there is ample evidence that stronger environmental pressure on firms is likely to lead to additional innovation activities to address this pressure. It is likely that this mechanism also applies to pressure from climate change, leading to our first hypothesis:
根据现有文献，有充分的证据表明，企业面临的更大环境压力可能会导致更多的创新活动来应对这一压力。这种机制很可能也适用于气候变化的压力，从而得出我们的第一个假设：
H1. The more a firm is affected by climate change, the more likely it will engage in innovations for mitigating adverse impacts on the environment (‘eco-innovations’).
H1.公司受气候变化的影响越大，就越有可能从事创新以减轻对环境的不利影响（“生态创新”）。

Firm activities can result in different types of negative environmental externalities, ranging from air, water, soil or noise emissions to the consumption of scarce natural resources and environmental exposure from hazardous substances. Consequently, eco-innovations can address a broad range of environmental pressures (Horbach et al., 2012; Triguero et al., 2013). Some types of eco-innovations are very directly related to mitigating climate change, such as energy savings, reducing or avoiding ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} emissions, and switching from fossil to renewable energy sources. Some areas of eco-innovations, such as waste management and recycling, also have the potential to reduce climate change impacts, though more indirectly, e.g. by reducing the need to produce new material from natural resources by increasing the recycling rate for used material. Other types of eco-innovations such as preventing water pollution, avoiding hazardous substances or noise reduction have little links to mitigating climate change. It is hence likely that climate change
企业活动可能导致不同类型的负面环境外部性，从空气、水、土壤或噪音排放到稀缺自然资源的消耗和有害物质的环境暴露。因此，生态创新可以解决广泛的环境压力（Horbach 等人，2012 年;Triguero et al.， 2013）。某些类型的生态创新与缓解气候变化非常直接相关，例如节能、减少或避免 ${\mathrm{CO}}_2$${\mathrm{CO}}_2$CO_(2)\mathrm{CO}_{2} 排放以及从化石能源转向可再生能源。一些生态创新领域，如废物管理和回收，也有可能减少对气候变化的影响，尽管是间接的，例如，通过提高废旧材料的回收率，减少对自然资源生产新材料的需求。其他类型的生态创新，如防止水污染、避免有害物质或减少噪音，与缓解气候变化几乎没有联系。因此，气候变化很可能