Can ecological compensation reduce air pollution? New evidence from resource-based cities in China

被引:6
作者
Weng, Shimei [1 ]
Tao, Weiliang [1 ]
Cui, Lianbiao [2 ]
机构
[1] Fujian Normal Univ, Sch Math & Stat, Fuzhou, Fujian, Peoples R China
[2] Anhui Univ Finance & Econ, Sch Stat & Appl Math, Bengbu 233030, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Resource-based cities; ecological compensation; PM2.5; multi-period difference-in-difference model; heterogeneity analysis; ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; PAYMENTS; PERFORMANCE; ENDOWMENTS;
D O I
10.1080/15567249.2024.2351803
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
China has made great efforts to establish an ecological compensation mechanism, but there lacks empirical evidence on whether this scheme effectively reduces air pollution. To test the effectiveness of air quality ecological compensation (AQEC) on air pollution control, this study considers 114 resource-based cities in China and uses a multi-period difference-in-difference (DID) model for empirical analysis. The finding shows that the AQEC policy significantly reduces the concentration of air pollutants by promoting air pollution prevention and local authority enthusiasm for pollution abatement, resulting in an average annual decrease in PM2.5 concentrations of approximately 3.9 mu g/m(3) in the pilot cities. The AQEC policy of resource-based cities in eastern and northern China, and those with less financial pressure have greater inhibitory effects on air pollution. The study recommends establishing long-term protection mechanisms and implementing differentiated policies focused on green technological innovation and financial autonomy.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 65 条
[1]   How renewable energy consumption and natural resource abundance impact environmental degradation? New findings and policy implications from quantile approach [J].
Altinoz, Buket ;
Dogan, Eyup .
ENERGY SOURCES PART B-ECONOMICS PLANNING AND POLICY, 2021, 16 (04) :345-356
[2]   Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica [J].
Arriagada, Rodrigo A. ;
Ferraro, Paul J. ;
Sills, Erin O. ;
Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. ;
Cordero-Sancho, Silvia .
LAND ECONOMICS, 2012, 88 (02) :382-399
[3]   Big Bad Banks? The Winners and Losers from Bank Deregulation in the United States [J].
Beck, Thorsten ;
Levine, Ross ;
Levkov, Alexey .
JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2010, 65 (05) :1637-1667
[4]   Assessing restoration benefit of grassland ecosystem incorporating preference heterogeneity empirical data from Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region [J].
Cai, Yu ;
Zhao, Minjuan ;
Shi, Yuxing ;
Khan, Imran .
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2020, 117
[5]   Economic Development, Fiscal Ecological Compensation, and Ecological Environment Quality [J].
Cao, Hongjie ;
Li, Meina ;
Qin, Fengqin ;
Xu, Yankun ;
Zhang, Li ;
Zhang, Zhifeng .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (08)
[6]   Do carbon emission trading schemes stimulate green innovation in enterprises? Evidence from China [J].
Chen, Zhongfei ;
Zhang, Xiao ;
Chen, Fanglin .
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2021, 168
[7]   Ecological compensation in air pollution governance: China's efforts, challenges, and potential solutions [J].
Cui, Lianbiao ;
Duan, Hongbo ;
Mo, Jianlei ;
Song, Malin .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, 2021, 74
[8]   Theory and valuation of cross-regional ecological compensation for cultivated land: A case study of Shanxi province, China [J].
Ding Zhenmin ;
Yao Shunbo .
ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2022, 136
[9]   Environmental regulation, green technology innovation, and industrial structure upgrading: The road to the green transformation of Chinese cities [J].
Du, Kerui ;
Cheng, Yuanyuan ;
Yao, Xin .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2021, 98 (98)
[10]  
Gan Z. Y., 2021, China Population, Resources Environment, V31, P271