Abstract
This paper compares the economic efficiency of firm-agency governance structures for pollution reduction using transaction costs economics. Two governance structures are analyzed with the transaction costs approach: command and control regulation (CCR) and negotiated agreements (NAs). We propose that the choice of governance structure depends on the strategies firms pursue given the attributes of their transactions and their market opportunities. The application of transaction cost economics analysis leads to different choices of regulatory instruments. Firms in more mature, stable industries are likely to choose command and control, while firms in new, dynamic sectors are more likely to opt for negotiated agreements. Frequency of transactions is a key factor in firm choice.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | 3 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-20 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Business and Politics |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 2004 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth
-
SDG 9 Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
Keywords
- Command and control regulation
- Environmental pollution
- Environmental regulation
- Environmental voluntary agreements
- Governance stucture
- Negotiated agreements
- Transaction cost economics
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Firms' choice of regulatory instruments to reduce pollution: A transaction cost approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS