グリーンイノベーション、環境規制、企業の炭素削減の非線形動学

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a formal dynamic-systems template for modeling regulation–innovation–abatement interactions with bistability and hysteresis.

🏢実務担当者:Suggests that transition-plan credibility depends on sustained regulatory pressure and accumulated green capability, not one-off measures.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights that temporary regulation must be sufficiently intense and long-lasting to shift firms to a high-abatement regime.

Corporate carbon abatement is commonly modeled as a direct and continuous response to environmental regulation or green innovation. Such representations cannot fully explain persistent differences among firms facing similar policy conditions or distinguish the pressure required to initiate a low-carbon transition from that needed to sustain it. This study develops a three-state continuous-time model linking corporate carbon abatement, accumulated green innovation, and effective regulatory pressure, with green market preference treated as an external demand-pull parameter. Green innovation lowers the marginal cost of abatement, abatement generates learning and commercial returns to innovation, and regulatory pressure responds to residual emissions while relaxing as abatement and credible green capability improve. The regulation--innovation channel is non-monotonic: moderate pressure strengthens innovation incentives, whereas the marginal stimulus declines at high pressure. The analysis combines equilibrium and stability analysis, saddle-node verification, attraction-basin classification, temporary-policy simulations, regime mapping, and global sensitivity analysis. Under the baseline configuration, two locally stable equilibria are separated by a saddle, and nondegenerate saddle-node thresholds generate hysteresis between low- and high-abatement states. Green market preference lowers the transition threshold, while temporary regulation succeeds only when both intensity and duration are sufficient. Regulatory adjustment may generate damped oscillatory modes, but no Hopf crossing is detected within the examined range. The findings show that regulatory pressure acts as an adaptive state-transition mechanism through which initial capability, policy timing, and market demand shape persistent corporate carbon-abatement outcomes. Broader stress tests confirm that bistability is conditional and can disappear under weak innovation capacity or combined adverse structural conditions. The numerical procedures developed here---multistart root finding,adaptive Runge--Kutta integration, analytical Jacobian evaluation,and Latin-hypercube sensitivity design---are transferable tocontinuous-time state-transition models in other applied domains.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.62762/jnspm.2026.289453first seen 2026-11-01 04:41:33 · last seen 2026-11-06 04:36:12