| Literature DB >> 35886726 |
Rong Wang1, Fayuan Wang2.
Abstract
Finance is the blood of the economy, and energy is the foundation and source of power for economic and social development. It is crucial to the prosperity and development of the country, the improvement of people's lives and the long-term stability of society. It is a booster for the implementation of the concept of green development and the realization of high-quality economic development (HQED). Based on the panel data of 11 provinces and cities in the Yangtze River Economic Belt from 2007 to 2019, this paper selects green investment and carbon emission intensity as green financial values and calculates energy development indicators from the three dimensions of energy supply, energy consumption and energy efficiency. The three dimensions of development capability, high-quality development structure and high-quality development benefit are used to construct an indicator system for high-quality economic development, and the spatial Durbin model is selected to study the spatial effects of green finance and energy development on high-quality economic development. At the same time, the mediation effect model is used to test whether there is a mediation effect in the development of green finance on high-quality economic development. The results show that: green finance has a significant positive impact on high-quality economic development, and the spatial spillover effect is not significant; energy development has a significant positive impact on high-quality economic development, and the spatial spillover effect is significantly negative; the interaction term between green finance and energy development has a significant negative impact on high-quality economic development, and the spatial spillover effect is not significant and green finance plays a partial intermediary role in the process of energy development promoting high-quality economic development. Existing research considers less of the impact of green finance on high-quality development. On the one hand, the research in this paper can theoretically supplement and improve existing research and expand the research field; on the other hand, it can provide a policy basis for the realization of high-quality development in the region, which has important practical significance for the realization of sustainable development goals in the region.Entities:
Keywords: energy development; green finance; high-quality economic development
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35886726 PMCID: PMC9320155 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148875
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Relationship of X, Y and M.
Comprehensive evaluation index system.
| Dimension Layer | Index Layer | Unit | Attributes | Weights |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ability (0.4269) | GDP growth rate | % | + | 0.0499 |
| Social labor productivity | Ten thousand yuan/person | + | 0.1022 | |
| Per capita investment in fixed assets | yuan | + | 0.0579 | |
| Total retail sales of consumer goods per capita | yuan | + | 0.0991 | |
| Science and technology expenditure as a percentage of GDP | % | + | 0.1178 | |
| Structure (0.2671) | The proportion of the secondary industry in GDP | % | − | 0.0619 |
| The proportion of the tertiary industry in GDP | % | + | 0.0670 | |
| Population urbanization rate | % | + | 0.0705 | |
| Fiscal revenue as a percentage of GDP | % | + | 0.0677 | |
| Benefit (0.3060) | GDP per capita | yuan | + | 0.1138 |
| Per capita income ratio between urban and rural areas | / | − | 0.0446 | |
| Urban registered unemployment rate | % | - | 0.0796 | |
| Resident Engel coefficient | % | - | 0.0680 |
Comprehensive evaluation index system for energy development.
| Dimension Layer | Index Layer | Unit | Attributes | Weights |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy supply (0.2626) | Energy consumption per capita | Tons of standard coal |
| 0.2626 |
| Energy consumption (0.5941) | Coal consumption | Ten thousand tons | − | 0.2587 |
| Electricity consumption | Billion kWh |
| 0.2739 | |
| Natural gas consumption | One hundred million cubic meters |
| 0.0615 | |
| Energy efficiency (0.1433) | Energy consumption per unit of GDP | Tons of standard coal/ten thousand yuan | − | 0.0744 |
| Electricity consumption per unit GDP | KWh/CYN | − | 0.0689 |
Variable descriptive statistics.
| Variable | Observed Value | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-quality economic development (HQED) | 143 | 0.3675 | 0.1714 | 0.1634 | 0.8436 |
| Green finance (GF) | 143 | 0.4751 | 0.1443 | 0.0751 | 0.7533 |
| Energy development (ED) | 143 | 0.3553 | 0.1165 | 0.1891 | 0.6732 |
| Technology market environment (TME) | 143 | 0.8505 | 0.8683 | 0.0229 | 3.9895 |
| Financial development (FD) | 143 | 6.1120 | 2.8769 | 1.7533 | 17.2035 |
| Education level (EL) | 143 | 1.7933 | 0.4363 | 0.6655 | 2.6189 |
| Human capital (HC) | 143 | 59.0394 | 5.3398 | 44.0446 | 72.2957 |
Economic high-quality global Moran index.
| Year | I | Year | I |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 0.238 *** | 2014 | 0.328 *** |
| 2008 | 0.191 *** | 2015 | 0.303 *** |
| 2009 | 0.219 *** | 2016 | 0.215 *** |
| 2010 | 0.205 *** | 2017 | 0.192 *** |
| 2011 | 0.223 *** | 2018 | 0.182 *** |
| 2012 | 0.250 *** | 2019 | 0.160 *** |
| 2013 | 0.301 *** |
Note: *** means p < 0.01.
Model selection related test results.
| Test Type | Null Hypothesis | Statistics | result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LM test | SEM | 13.422 *** |
|
| Steady SEM | 33.329 *** | ||
| SAR | 11.291 *** | ||
| Steady SAR | 33.198 ** | ||
| Hausman test | Random effect | 163.18 *** | Fixed effect |
| Wald test | SDM can be simplified to SEM or SAR | 46.89 *** |
|
| LR test | SDM can be simplified to SEM or SAR | 38.10 *** |
|
| 38.79 *** | |||
| Spatial fixed effect is better than double fixed effect | 43.95 *** | Double fixed effect | |
| Point fixed effect due to double fixed effect | 170.09 *** |
Note: *** means p < 0.01, ** means p < 0.05.
Estimation results of spatial Durbin model.
| Variable | Coefficient | z Value | Variable | Coefficient | z Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green finance (GF) | 0.1845 * | 1.66 | W*GF | −0.2197 | −0.98 |
| Energy development (ED) | 0.5787 *** | 3.28 | W*ED | −1.1041 *** | −2.69 |
| GF_ED | −0.6102 ** | −2.12 | W*GF_ED | 0.7938 | 1.25 |
| Technology market environment (TME) | 0.0382 *** | 4.40 | W*TME | −0.0081 | −0.49 |
| Financial development (FD) | 0.0131 *** | 3.11 | W*FD | −0.0141 | −1.64 |
| Education level (EL) | 0.0666 *** | 3.05 | W*EL | 0.1218 ** | 2.25 |
| Human capital (HC) | −0.0029 ** | −2.15 | W*HC | −0.0100 *** | −3.02 |
Note: ***, ** and * mean p < 0.01, p < 0.05 and p < 0.1.
Test results of the intermediary effect of green finance.
| Variable | High-Quality Economic Development (HQED) Model (3) | Green Finance (GF) Model (4) | High-Quality Economic Development (HQED) Model (5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy development (ED) | 0.3421 *** | 0.1349 * | 0.2886 *** |
| (6.22) | (1.69) | (4.53) | |
| Green Finance (GF) | 0.2293 *** | ||
| (5.43) | |||
| W*ED | 1.7086 *** | 1.0360 *** | 1.3782 *** |
| (10.38) | (4.08) | (8.06) | |
| W*GF | 0.3217 *** | ||
| (3.28) | |||
| Col | √ | √ | √ |
Note: *** and * mean p < 0.01 and p < 0. 1.