A vast theoretical and empirical literature has been devoted to exploring the relationship between environmental regulation and total factor productivity (TFP), but no consensus has been reached and the reason may be attributed to the fact that the resource reallocation effect of environmental regulation is ignored. In this paper, we introduce resource misallocation in the process of discussing the impact of environmental regulation on TFP, taking China’s provincial industrial panel data from 1997 to 2017 as a sample, and the spatial econometric method is employed to investigate whether environmental regulation has a resource reallocation effect and affects TFP. The results indicate that there is a U-shaped relationship between environmental regulation and industrial TFP and a negative spatial spillover effect of environmental regulation on industrial TFP at the provincial level in China. Both capital misallocation and labor misallocation will lead to the loss of industrial TFP. Capital misallocation has a negative spatial spillover effect on industrial TFP, while labor misallocation is just the opposite. Environmental regulation can produce a positive resource reallocation effect, which in turn promotes the industrial TFP in the range of 28% to 33%, while capital misallocation and labor misallocation are only partial mediator.

How environmental regulation affects factor allocation is becoming an emerging hot topic in academia. In this paper, we construct a dynamic general equilibrium model accommodating environmental regulatory shock based on the H-K framework to explain the impact of environmental regulation on factor misallocation from the perspective of aggregate total factor productivity loss changes, and numerical simulation results are provided for several representative scenarios. The results show that environmental regulation has a significant effect on factor market misallocation, but this effect is not simply positive or negative, and it mainly depends on the firms’ initial factor allocation status and the intensity of the shock. Reducing the intensity of environmental regulation for firms that face stronger distortion helps mitigate factor misallocation and, on the contrary, the same policy could exacerbate factor market misallocation. Under the environmental regulatory shock condition, firms’ overhead labor input has a moderating effect on the factor allocation mitigation of environmental regulation. Distorted firms’ higher overhead labor share inhibits the correction of factor misallocation by environmental regulation. And reducing firms’ overhead labor share amplifies the correcting effect of environmental regulation on factor misallocation.