| Literature DB >> 35682534 |
Bing Xia1, Suocheng Dong1,2, Zehong Li1,2, Minyan Zhao3, Dongqi Sun1, Wenbiao Zhang4, Yu Li1,2.
Abstract
Eco-efficiency analysis can provide useful information about sustainability in the tourism industry, which has an important role in both global economy recovery and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), generating considerable indirect carbon emissions with respect to the supply chain due to its significant connections to other industries. This study, from the perspective of tourism sectors, including tourism hotels, travel agencies, and scenic spots, integrated the environmentally extended input-output analysis (EEIO) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) models to develop a research framework, analyzing the indirect carbon emissions of the tourism supply chain, evaluating eco-efficiency with respect to both direct carbon emissions and total carbon emissions (including direct and indirect parts), and exploring the driving factors of eco-efficiency of tourism sectors using Tobit regression models. This study took Gansu as a case, a province in China characterized by higher carbon intensity, an underdeveloped economy, and rapid tourism growth. The results demonstrate that (1) tourism hotels contribute the most carbon emissions in tourism sectors, especially indirectly due to the supply chain, with carbon emissions mainly resulting from the manufacturing of food and tobacco; (2) the eco-efficiency of tourism sectors in Gansu presents a U-shaped curve, which is consistent with Kuznets' theory; and (3) energy technology is key to improving the eco-efficiency of tourism sectors. The research results provide a clear path for the reduction of carbon emissions and the improvement of eco-efficiency in Gansu tourism sectors. Against the backdrop of global climate change and the post-COVID-19 era, our research framework and findings provide a reference for similar regions and countries who are in urgent need of rapid tourism development to effect economic recovery.Entities:
Keywords: carbon emissions; data envelopment analysis (DEA); eco-efficiency; environmentally extended input–output analysis (EEIO); supply chain; tourism sector
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35682534 PMCID: PMC9180480 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116951
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Research framework.
Figure 2Study area and its economic growth with respect to the tourism industry from 1997 to 2016.
Input–output table.
| F | Intermediate Use | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industrial Sector | S1 | … | S | … | Sn | Final Use | Total Output | |
| Intermediate input | IS1 |
| … |
| … |
|
|
|
| ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | … | … | |||
| ISi |
| … |
| … |
|
|
| |
| ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | ⋮ | … | … | |||
| ISn |
| … |
| … |
|
|
| |
| Value added |
| … |
| … |
| |||
| Total input |
| … |
| … |
| |||
Note: The part of table in yellow denotes intermediate inputs and outputs, the part of table in bule denotes final use, the part of table in green denotes value added, and the column in red border denote supply chain.
Input–output indicators for assessing the eco-efficiency of tourism sectors in Gansu Province based on carbon emissions.
| Indicator | Data Source | Unit | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input | Number of employees | Yearbook of China Tourism Statistics | Count |
| Original cost of fixed assets | Yearbook of China Tourism Statistics | 10,000 Yuan | |
| Output | Operating revenue | Yearbook of China Tourism Statistics | 10,000 Yuan |
| Undesirable output | Direct carbon emissions/Total carbon emissions | Calculation | 10,000 tons |
Description of variables for the analysis of the drivers of tourism sector eco-efficiency in Gansu Province.
| Variable | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HDE | 0.7936 | 0.1882 | 0.3619 | 1.0000 |
| HTE | 0.6014 | 0.2972 | 0.2581 | 1.0000 |
| HS | 0.5755 | 0.0990 | 0.3243 | 0.8449 |
| HEI | 0.3139 | 0.0561 | 0.2464 | 0.4089 |
| lnHTI | 11.5222 | 0.5330 | 10.4293 | 12.1225 |
| lnHTP | 9.8961 | 0.5825 | 8.7744 | 10.4335 |
| lnHRI | 1.1084 | 0.3276 | 0.0000 | 1.5056 |
| TDE | 0.6592 | 0.2500 | 0.3227 | 1.0000 |
| TTE | 0.5870 | 0.2556 | 0.2835 | 1.0000 |
| TS | 0.2691 | 0.0631 | 0.0873 | 0.3545 |
| TEI | 0.2310 | 0.0419 | 0.1704 | 0.3016 |
| lnTTI | 10.7397 | 0.5922 | 9.5321 | 11.5509 |
| lnTTP | 13.3644 | 0.5396 | 12.1093 | 14.1544 |
| TRI | 0.9485 | 1.2501 | 0.0680 | 6.0133 |
| SDE | 0.7771 | 0.2777 | 0.2175 | 1.0000 |
| STE | 0.6993 | 0.3128 | 0.1977 | 1.0000 |
| SS | 0.1554 | 0.0981 | 0.0536 | 0.4709 |
| SEI | 0.2310 | 0.0419 | 0.1704 | 0.3016 |
| lnSTI | 10.0833 | 0.9741 | 8.6770 | 12.3838 |
| lnSTP | 16.3363 | 1.2287 | 14.6281 | 18.3264 |
| SRI | 3.2302 | 2.0131 | 0.5775 | 8.1709 |
| lnPGDP | 9.0238 | 0.6053 | 8.0706 | 9.8162 |
| THI | 0.4075 | 0.0417 | 0.3347 | 0.5141 |
| UR | 0.3177 | 0.0789 | 0.1839 | 0.4467 |
| lnED | 3.0698 | 0.7644 | 1.6233 | 3.8225 |
| lnRO | 1.9817 | 0.5917 | 1.2698 | 2.6603 |
| lnFR | 8.1080 | 0.7943 | 5.4972 | 8.9434 |
Figure 3Carbon emissions of tourism sectors in Gansu Province during the 1997–2016 period.
Figure 4The main sources of indirect carbon emissions from tourism sectors in Gansu Province.
Figure 5Eco-efficiency of tourism sectors in Gansu Province during the 1997–2016 period.
Tobit regression results for factors that drive the tourism eco-efficiency of tourism hotels, travel agencies, and scenic spots in Gansu Province.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef. | t | Coef. | t | Coef. | t | Coef. | t | Coef. | t | Coef. | t | |
| HS | 0.8167 | 1.46 | 1.5175 | 2.2 * | ||||||||
| D1.lnHTI | 1.7599 | 3.69 *** | 1.8436 | 2.92 ** | ||||||||
| D1.lnHTP | −1.2001 | −2.77 ** | −1.3645 | −2.27 * | ||||||||
| D1.HEI | −3.3593 | −4.48 *** | −1.5378 | −1.67 | ||||||||
| D1.lnHRI | 1.6817 | 3.44 ** | 1.3837 | 2.43 ** | ||||||||
| TS | −3.1697 | −2.21 * | −2.2856 | −2.7 ** | ||||||||
| D1.lnTTI | −0.2767 | -1.3 | −0.2821 | −1.47 | ||||||||
| lnTTP | 0.7395 | 1.43 | 0.7499 | 1.78 | ||||||||
| TEI | −5.2951 | −2.62 ** | −3.3253 | −2.12 * | ||||||||
| TRI | −0.0118 | −0.25 | −0.0050 | −0.13 | ||||||||
| SS | 16.0436 | 3.26 ** | 2.9920 | 2.39 ** | ||||||||
| D1.lnSTI | −7.7122 | −3.49 ** | −1.3180 | −2.62 ** | ||||||||
| D1.lnSTP | 3.7003 | 3.41 ** | 0.7931 | 2.23 * | ||||||||
| SEI | −81.4394 | −3.34 ** | −9.3551 | −2.45 ** | ||||||||
| SRI | 0.4058 | −4.65 *** | −0.0834 | −1.72 | ||||||||
| D2.lnpgdp | −1.2876 | −1.65 | 0.5526 | 0.58 | 2.2572 | 1.2 | 0.9559 | 0.75 | 18.9987 | 3.22 ** | −0.6318 | −0.42 |
| D1.thirdi | −2.5387 | −0.77 | −0.7067 | −0.18 | −7.1938 | −1.65 | −8.7556 | −2.89 ** | 40.0462 | 3 ** | −2.4897 | −0.43 |
| D1.urban | 15.1017 | 1.68 | 15.4329 | 1.04 | −3.4939 | −0.24 | 5.2261 | 0.43 | −115.4852 | −2.57 ** | 14.4444 | 0.82 |
| lnedu | 0.0667 | 0.49 | −0.6814 | −3.6 *** | −1.1568 | −2.63 ** | −1.0686 | −3.49 ** | −9.7988 | −3.17 ** | −1.3673 | −2.26 * |
| D1.lnroad | 0.1216 | 0.7 | 0.1952 | 0.85 | −0.3837 | −1.38 | −0.2979 | −1.18 | 1.8133 | 3.5 ** | 0.4618 | 1.14 |
| lnfr | 0.3104 | 1.83 | 1.1500 | 5.47 *** | 0.7369 | 0.98 | 0.8118 | 1.52 | 8.1213 | 3.06 ** | 1.5389 | 2.36 * |
| _cons | −2.7007 | −1.94 * | −7.8254 | −4.84 *** | −9.4326 | −2.44** | −11.3842 | −3.42 ** | −14.0173 | −2.25* | −5.7348 | −1.96 * |
| Log likelihood | 7.8004 | 6.0796 | 4.7628 | 7.3352 | 3.5624 | −1.8279 | ||||||
Note: *, **, and *** denote significance at the 0.1, 0.05, and 0.01 levels, respectively. D1. and D2. denote first order difference and second difference, respectively.