Environmental regulators often use environmental policy to induce green investment by firms. However, if an environmental policy fails to exert a long-run effect on regulating the economic agents’ behavior, it may be more reasonable to think of the firm as the leader in the game, since the investment in green technology is usually a strategic decision. In this paper, we consider a three-stage Stackelberg game to address the interaction between a profit-maximizing firm (Stackelberg leader) facing emission-dependent demand, and the environmental regulator (Stackelberg follower). The firm decides on the green technology level in the first stage of the game based on its understanding of the regulator’s profits function, especially an environmental concern that is introduced as an exogenous variable. In the current research, we show that high levels of the regulator’s environmental concerns do not necessarily lead to the choice of green technology by the firm, and green investment level depends on the combined effects of the market and operational factors for a given level of the regulator’s environmental concerns. The result also shows that increasing environmental awareness amongst the consumers is an effective way to drive the firm’s green investment.

Regulators often use environmental policy to induce green initiatives by firms. This paper examines the emission-reduction-inducement effect of the environmental tax deduction (ETD) incentive by Stackelberg game models between an environmental regulator and a profit-maximizing monopolistic firm facing emission-dependent demand. Different cases, i.e., with/without considering the regulator’s environmental concerns, were used to investigate the ETD policy effects with a numerical example. This paper shows that the regulator’s tax policy will only affect the emission reduction level, but cannot influence the output, which combined with the firm’s operation factors mainly depends the consumers’ attitude toward green products and price sensitivity. Numerical simulation results showed that for the cases with a moderate level of environmental concern and emission standard, the regulator can set an ETD incentive to motivate the choice of a higher level of emission reduction and simultaneously increase social welfare; otherwise, the increase in environmental quality is at the expense of social welfare. When the market’s environmental consciousness increases, it is easier for the regulator to guide the firm to adopt an ETD solution. Therefore, improving consumers’ awareness of environmental protection is an effective way to promote green investment of firms.