Abstract The impact of environmental regulation on competitiveness is a major issue of concern to policy makers. It has also been the subject of considerable academic debate in the past few years on environment-competitiveness. The relationship between environmental goals and industrial competitiveness has conventionally been thought of as involving a tradeoff between social benefits and private costs. In the recent decade, the environment-competitiveness debate has been shifted to a new dynamic international competitiveness paradigm. Michael Porter suggested that the traditional trade-off between environmental regulation and competitiveness may have overestimated environmental compliance costs, neglected innovation offsets, and disregarded the affected industry's initial competitiveness. In this thesis, we aim to examine firm-level evidence to assess the Porter hypothesis as well as the basic correlation between environmental goals and industrial competitiveness. Our approach mainly concentrates on the possibility of Porter hypothesis. Porter hypothesis suggests that more severe environmental regulation may have a positive effect on firm¡¦s performance by stimulating innovation. To capture the dynamic impacts and the incurred adjustments for enterprises in complying with the environmental standard requires a model with dynamic adjustment features. Our investigation shows that the impact of environmental regulation on TFP growth rate could become less detrimental and even positive, confirming the Porter hypothesis. This dynamic pattern is seen clearly in our results in many samples.