这研究是去年年底发布的，看着严格的环境立法之间的关系及其对生产力的影响。研究人员提出了一套指数 - 一个指数计算了“绿色”政策的价格，另一个索引了这一政策的严格性，最终指数计算了遵守“绿色”政策的行政负担。

支持较早的研究和非政府组织的调查结果表明，一些公司实际上在更严格的环境政策下做得更好，因为它们被迫投资更好的技术，提高其运营效率。更具体地说，他们建议已经富有成效的公司从环境政策中受益，而那些生产率较低的人受苦。

该研究表明，北欧国家和荷兰是其环境立法中最严格的，而希腊和意大利是最宽松的。It also warns against assuming that the impact of a law or policy on a company is the same as the impact on the economy as a whole, and that in many cases a ‘green’ rule may be a burden for a company but not adversely affect the overall economy.

与此同时，Chemsec Ngo列出了行业夸大环境法成本的地方的一些例子。

在它哭狼报告称，Chemsec表示，据提出了引入催化转化器和低硫燃料的可能成本，这已经证明已被证明是相当大的高估。It also criticises the British pesticide industry for saying the EU’s 2009 pesticide regulation would effectively ban 15% of pesticides when virtually none have been banned, and it says the French chemicals industry argued that the ‘Reach’ regulation would cost France around €28 billion over 10 years, when the actual cost has been about a tenth of that.