Số 234 | Tháng 9/2025
Chính sách công hướng đến hành vi xanh và năng lực cạnh tranh quốc gia trong điều kiện thay đổi thuế toàn cầu
Vương Quốc Thắng
Tóm tắt:
Mục tiêu nghiên cứu: Nghiên cứu phân tích mối quan hệ giữa chính sách công (CSC) định hướng hành vi xanh (HVX) và năng lực cạnh tranh (NLCT) quốc gia trong bối cảnh cơ chế thuế toàn cầu (TTC) thay đổi, đặc biệt là chính sách thuế đối ứng của Mỹ.
Thiết kế nghiên cứu/phương pháp/tiếp cận: Bằng cách kết hợp phương pháp định tính và định lượng đã kiểm định các giả thuyết dựa trên lý thuyết Hành vi có kế hoạch (Theory of Planned Behavior – TPB) và mô hình NLCT quốc gia.
Kết quả nghiên cứu chính: Kết quả cho thấy CSC định hướng xanh có tác động cùng chiều đến HVX; HVX giữ vai trò trung gian then chốt trong việc chuyển hóa chính sách thành NLCT quốc gia; áp lực TTC vừa làm suy yếu tác động của chính sách vừa củng cố tầm quan trọng của HVX đối với NLCT.
Giá trị đóng góp mới: Nghiên cứu đóng góp mô hình lý thuyết tích hợp mới, cung cấp bằng chứng thực nghiệm cho các nền kinh tế đang phát triển như Việt Nam trong quá trình chuyển đổi xanh (CĐX). Tuy nhiên, việc tập trung vào một trường hợp nghiên cứu duy nhất và dữ liệu khảo sát có thể hạn chế khả năng khái quát. Các hàm ý chính sách nhấn mạnh nhu cầu xây dựng hệ thống chính sách tích hợp, thúc đẩy HVX và nâng cao khả năng thích ứng với những chuẩn mực thuế môi trường toàn cầu.
Tài liệu tham khảo:
- Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2005). Institutions as the fundamental cause of long-run growth. Handbook of Economic Growth, 1, 385-472.
- Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
- Borghesi, S., Cainelli, G., & Mazzanti, M. (2015). Linking emission trading to environmental innovation: Evidence from the Italian manufacturing industry. Research Policy, 44(3), 669–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.014.
- Cainelli, G., De Marchi, V., & Grandinetti, R. (2015). Does the development of environmental innovation require different resources? Evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 94, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.008.
- Calel, R., & Dechezleprêtre, A. (2016). Environmental policy and directed technological change: Evidence from the European carbon market. Review of Economics and Statistics, 98(1), 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00572.
- Chen, Y. S., Lin, M. J. J., & Chang, C. H. (2015). The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9025-5
- Costantini, V., & Mazzanti, M. (2012). On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Research Policy, 41(1), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.08.004.
- EC. (2023). Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM): Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu.
- Dechezleprêtre, A., & Sato, M. (2017). The impacts of environmental regulations on competitiveness. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11(2), 183–206. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rex013.
- De Marchi, V. (2012). Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 41(3), 614–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.002.
- Del Río, P., & Carrillo-Hermosilla, J. (2009). An analysis of the determinants of eco-innovations. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(4), 573–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2008.04.009.
- Gangi, F., Varrone, N., Daniele, L. M., & Coscia, M. (2022). Mainstreaming socially responsible investment: Do environmental, social and governance ratings of investment funds converge? Journal of Cleaner Production, 353, 131684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13168.
- Horbach, J. (2008). Determinants of environmental innovation—New evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, 37(1), 163–173. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.006.
- Hai, D. H. (2018). Statistical Probability and Quantitative Methods in Economics. Hanoi Labor Publishing House.
- IMD. (2023). World Competitiveness Yearbook 2023. Lausanne: International Institute for Management Development (IMD).
- Li, G., & Ramanathan, R. (2018). Exploring the relationships between different types of environmental regulations and environmental performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 1329–1340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.132.
- Lee, K. H., & Min, B. (2015). Green R&D for eco-innovation and its impact on carbon emissions and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108(Part A), 534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.114.
- OECD. (2021). Taxing energy use for sustainable development: Opportunities for energy tax and subsidy reform in selected developing and emerging economies. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/89167cef-en.
- Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Free Press.
- Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.
- Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions rule: The primacy of institutions over geography and integration in economic development. Journal of Economic Growth, 9(2), 131–165. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOEG.0000031425.72248.85.
- Testa, F., Iraldo, F., & Frey, M. (2016). The effect of environmental regulation on firms’ competitive performance: The case of the building & construction sector in some EU regions. Journal of Environmental Management, 183(3), 830–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.039.
- Triguero, A., Moreno-Mondéjar, L., & Davia, M. A. (2013). Drivers of different types of eco-innovation in European SMEs. Ecological Economics, 92, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.009.
- Vietnam Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (2021). National Strategy on Green Growth 2021–2030. Hanoi: MONRE.
- WEF. (2018). The Global Competitiveness Report 2018. Geneva: WEF.
- World Bank (2022). State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2022. Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org
- WEF (2023). Global Competitiveness Report 2023. Geneva: WEF.
Public Policy on Green Behavior and National Competitiveness in the Era of Global Tax Changes
Abstract:
Purpose: This study analyzes the relationship between green-oriented public policy (CSC), green behavior (HVX), and national competitiveness (NLCT) in the context of changing global tax mechanisms (TTC), with particular emphasis on the United States’ countervailing tax policy.
Design/methodology/approach: By combining qualitative and quantitative methods, the study tests hypotheses derived from the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the national competitiveness model.
Findings: The findings indicate that green-oriented public policy exerts a positive effect on green behavior; green behavior serves as a key mediating factor in transforming policy into national competitiveness; and global tax pressures both weaken the direct impact of policy and reinforce the importance of green behavior for competitiveness.
Originality/value: The study contributes a new integrated theoretical model and provides empirical evidence for developing economies such as Vietnam in their green transition (CĐX). However, the focus on a single case study and survey-based data may limit the generalizability of the findings. The policy implications highlight the need to design an integrated policy system that fosters green behavior and enhances adaptability to global environmental tax standards.