| Literature DB >> 35421146 |
Hongmei Wen1, Jingliang Yue1,2, Jian Li1, Xuedan Xiu2, Shen Zhong1.
Abstract
Industrial pollution reduction is a crucial issue in the pursuit of sustainable economic and environmental development. As a product of the deep integration of traditional finance and Internet information technology, digital finance has become an effective tool for regulating the use of funds and strengthening the effectiveness of policies in the context of the digital era, which has obvious effects on industrial pollution emissions. Using panel data of 260 prefecture-level cities in China from 2011-2019 and the digital inclusive finance index jointly compiled by Peking University and Ant Financial Services Group, this paper empirically analyzes the impact of digital finance on industrial pollution emissions through fixed effects model, mediating effects model and threshold effects model. The empirical results show that digital finance can effectively reduce industrial pollution and part of the impact is achieved through industrial structure. In the process of reducing industrial pollution by digital finance, there exists double threshold effects. When the development of digital finance breaks the threshold value, the industrial pollution emission reduction effect appears to accelerate. Finally, this paper puts forward targeted suggestions to promote industrial pollution reduction and environmental economic development.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35421146 PMCID: PMC9009666 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266564
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Variable selection and definition.
| Variable Name | Variable Meaning | Metrics |
|---|---|---|
| pol | Industrial Pollution | The sum of industrial wastewater, industrial sulfur dioxide and industrial dust emissions per square kilometer |
| df | Digital Financial Development | Digital Inclusive Finance Index/100 |
| lnpgdp | Economic Growth | Logarithm of gdp per capita |
| lnpopu | Population Density | Logarithmic value of population per square kilometer |
| Innovation | Technology Innovation | Innovation and Entrepreneurship Index Total Index Score |
| Lnfc | Offshore Investment | Logarithm of the actual amount of foreign capital used in the current year |
| Edu | Education Level | Number of general higher education teachers per 10,000 people |
Descriptive statistics of variables.
| Variable | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pol | 2340 | 8.194 | 13.269 | 0 | 259.857 |
| wwater | 2340 | .745 | 1.439 | 0 | 19.976 |
| so2 | 2340 | 4.234 | 6.043 | 0 | 66.49 |
| dust | 2340 | 3.216 | 9.626 | 0 | 254.935 |
| df | 2340 | 1.661 | .653 | .213 | 3.216 |
| df1 | 2340 | 1.564 | .631 | .045 | 3.109 |
| df2 | 2340 | 1.645 | .677 | .125 | 3.32 |
| df3 | 2340 | 2.01 | .818 | .027 | 4.379 |
| lnpgdp | 2340 | 10.734 | .572 | 9.091 | 15.675 |
| lnpopu | 2340 | 5.794 | .871 | 1.513 | 7.923 |
| lnfc | 2340 | 10.006 | 1.887 | 0 | 14.544 |
| innovation | 2340 | 52.186 | 28.32 | .342 | 100 |
| edu | 2340 | 10.581 | 14.03 | 0 | 83.467 |
Basic regression results.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OLS | FE | RE | |
| df | -7.408 | -5.969 | -6.584 |
| (0.456) | (0.466) | (0.421) | |
| lnpgdp | 6.618 | 2.370 | 4.412 |
| (0.723) | (1.085) | (0.881) | |
| lnpopu | 3.724 | 10.549 | 3.505 |
| (0.337) | (5.754) | (0.592) | |
| innovation | 0.057 | 0.054 | 0.068 |
| (0.014) | (0.023) | (0.018) | |
| lnfc | -0.609 | -0.126 | -0.289 |
| (0.181) | (0.245) | (0.213) | |
| edu | -0.028 | -0.108 | -0.026 |
| (0.022) | (0.105) | (0.037) | |
| _cons | -68.719 | -68.851 | -48.890 |
| (7.126) | (34.034) | (9.065) | |
| Obs. | 2340 | 2340 | 2340 |
| FM test | 5.47 | ||
| LM test | 990.76 | ||
| Hausman test | 17.04 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis.
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Regression results of fixed effects for different dimensions of digital finance.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| pol | pol | pol | |
| df1 | -5.964 | ||
| (0.497) | |||
| df2 | -6.628 | ||
| (0.454) | |||
| df3 | -3.448 | ||
| (0.342) | |||
| lnpgdp | 1.468 | 3.986 | -0.479 |
| (1.071) | (1.092) | (1.039) | |
| lnpopu | 10.743 | 10.216 | 8.061 |
| (5.785) | (5.683) | (5.826) | |
| innovation | 0.057 | 0.047 | 0.059 |
| (0.023) | (0.022) | (0.023) | |
| lnfc | -0.059 | -0.288 | 0.093 |
| (0.246) | (0.244) | (0.247) | |
| edu | -0.105 | -0.119 | -0.167 |
| (0.106) | (0.104) | (0.107) | |
| _cons | -61.785 | -81.213 | -28.697 |
| (34.203) | (33.571) | (34.128) | |
| Obs. | 2340 | 2340 | 2340 |
| R-squared | 0.110 | 0.137 | 0.093 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Fig 1Marginal effects of df1, df2 and df3 on pol.
Regression results of fixed effects for different pollutants.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| wwater | so2 | dust | |
| df | -0.338 | -3.947 | -1.681 |
| (0.023) | (0.154) | (0.421) | |
| lnpgdp | 0.137 | 1.654 | 0.579 |
| (0.053) | (0.358) | (0.979) | |
| lnpopu | -0.162 | 6.681 | 3.989 |
| (0.278) | (1.900) | (5.192) | |
| innovation | 0.001 | 0.020 | 0.032 |
| (0.001) | (0.007) | (0.020) | |
| lnfc | -0.016 | 0.015 | -0.125 |
| (0.012) | (0.081) | (0.221) | |
| edu | 0.019 | 0.009 | -0.137 |
| (0.005) | (0.035) | (0.095) | |
| _cons | 0.660 | -46.996 | -22.274 |
| (1.646) | (11.241) | (30.711) | |
| Obs. | 2340 | 2340 | 2340 |
| R-squared | 0.146 | 0.338 | 0.016 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis.
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Mediating effects regression results.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| pol | TS | pol | |
| df | -7.408 | 0.435 | -6.740 |
| (0.456) | (0.016) | (0.521) | |
| TS | -1.535 | ||
| (0.581) | |||
| lnpgdp | 6.618 | -0.345 | 6.089 |
| (0.723) | (0.026) | (0.749) | |
| lnpopu | 3.724 | -0.132 | 3.521 |
| (0.337) | (0.012) | (0.346) | |
| innovation | 0.057 | 0.000 | 0.058 |
| (0.014) | (0.001) | (0.014) | |
| lnfc | -0.609 | 0.008 | -0.598 |
| (0.181) | (0.006) | (0.181) | |
| edu | -0.028 | 0.016 | -0.004 |
| (0.022) | (0.001) | (0.024) | |
| _cons | -68.719 | 4.461 | -61.870 |
| (7.126) | (0.253) | (7.575) | |
| Obs. | 2340 | 2340 | 2340 |
| R-squared | 0.183 | 0.354 | 0.186 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Threshold effects significance test.
| Threshold | RSS | MSE | Fstat | Prob | Crit10 | Crit5 | Crit1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single | 1.94e+05 | 83.1316 | 72.79 | 0.0000 | 18.9760 | 21.6075 | 28.2881 |
| Double | 1.91e+05 | 82.1394 | 28.16 | 0.0133 | 17.6543 | 22.0361 | 30.2856 |
| Triple | 1.90e+05 | 81.4073 | 20.96 | 0.2133 | 29.9483 | 39.3406 | 71.0409 |
Threshold estimation results.
| model | Threshold | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Th-1 | 1.8433 | 1.8180 | 1.8476 |
| Th-21 | 1.8110 | 1.7872 | 1.8142 |
| Th-22 | 2.1843 | 2.1456 | 2.1868 |
Fig 2The construction of confidence intervals.
Double threshold effects regression results.
| (1) | (2) | |
|---|---|---|
| VARIABLES | single | double |
| lnpgdp | 2.939 | 2.766 |
| (1.071) | (2.60) | |
| lnpopu | 9.585 | 11.749 |
| (5.669) | (2.08) | |
| innovation | 0.059 | 0.065 |
| (0.022) | (2.96) | |
| lnfc | -0.366 | -0.382 |
| (0.244) | (-1.58) | |
| edu | -0.087 | -0.063 |
| (0.104) | (-0.103) | |
| df(df≤1.8433) | -1.950 | |
| (0.679) | ||
| df (df> 1.8433) | -4.755 | |
| (0.483) | ||
| df(df≤1.8110) | -1.230* | |
| (0.701) | ||
| df(1.8110<df≤2.1843) | -3.377 | |
| (0.546) | ||
| df(df> 2.1843) | -4.880 | |
| (0.486) | ||
| Constant | -71.312 | -83.276 |
| (33.524) | (33.442) | |
| Observations | 2,340 | 2,340 |
| R-squared | 0.145 | 0.155 |
| Number of code | 260 | 260 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis.
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Phased regression results of digital finance in different dimensions.
| df≤1.8110 | 1.8110 <df≤2.1843 | df> 2.1843 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (1) | (2) | (3) | (1) | (2) | (3) | |
| pol | pol | pol | pol | pol | pol | pol | pol | pol | |
| df1 | -0.330 | -4.517 | -4.505 | ||||||
| (1.310) | (1.294) | (0.932) | |||||||
| df2 | -0.977 | -5.389 | -7.020 | ||||||
| (1.365) | (0.780) | (1.216) | |||||||
| df3 | -0.028 | 0.627 | -1.559 | ||||||
| (0.732) | (1.346) | (0.801) | |||||||
Standard errors are in parenthesis.
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.
Fig 3Marginal effects of three stages df1, df2 and df3 on pol in three stages.
Regression and robustness test results for instrumental variables.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| fitst | pol | pol | pol | pol | pm | |
| VARIABLES | df | pol | wwater | so2 | dust | |
| rate_inter | 1.941 | |||||
| (0.162) | ||||||
| df | -12.449 | -0.644 | -8.428 | -3.372 | -9.925 | |
| (1.912) | (0.092) | (0.717) | (1.657) | (0.359) | ||
| lnpgdp | 1.487 | 12.717 | 0.626 | 8.809 | 3.279 | -2.215 |
| (0.037) | (3.162) | (0.153) | (1.185) | (2.740) | (0.799) | |
| lnpopu | 1.144 | 18.813 | 0.228 | 12.396 | 6.145 | -0.917 |
| (0.261) | (6.453) | (0.312) | (2.419) | (5.591) | (4.594) | |
| innovation | -0.003 | 0.031 | 0.000 | 0.005 | 0.026 | -0.005 |
| (0.001) | (0.024) | (0.001) | (0.009) | (0.021) | (0.024) | |
| lnfc | -0.087 | -0.785 | -0.047 | -0.441 | -0.297 | -0.715 |
| (0.011) | (0.318) | (0.015) | (0.119) | (0.275) | (0.196) | |
| edu | 0.030 | 0.106 | 0.029 | 0.157 | -0.081 | -0.003 |
| (0.005) | (0.126) | (0.006) | (0.047) | (0.109) | (0.080) | |
| Observations | 2,340 | 2,340 | 2,340 | 2,340 | 2,340 | 2340 |
| R-squared | 0.036 | 0.070 | 0.067 | 0.008 | 0.486 | |
| Number of code | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 |
| Anderson LM | 134.854 | 134.854 | 134.854 | 134.854 | ||
| CDW | 143.787 | 143.787 | 143.787 | 143.787 |
Standard errors are in parenthesis
*** p<0.01,
** p<0.05,
* p<0.1.