| Literature DB >> 36011882 |
Meng Guo1, Shukai Cai1.
Abstract
Under environmental governance constraints, in order to explore the quantitative contribution of green innovation efficiency to carbon peak and carbon neutralization at the urban level, this paper uses the unexpected Super-SBM model to measure the green innovation efficiency of each prefecture-level city based on the panel data of 40 prefecture-level cities in the Yangtze River Delta from 2010 to 2019. Furthermore, the panel fixed effect model is constructed, and the two-stage least squares estimation method is used for empirical research. It is found that green innovation efficiency can significantly reduce carbon emissions in the Yangtze River Delta, promote carbon emissions in the Yangtze River Delta to reach an early peak, and achieve the long-term goal of carbon neutrality as soon as possible. This conclusion is still stable after solving the endogenous problem and the influence of outliers. The results of regional heterogeneity analysis show that green innovation efficiency has remarkable effects on carbon emission reduction in Anhui and Zhejiang Provinces, and the emission reduction effect in Zhejiang Province is greater than that in Anhui Province. In addition, there exists obvious heterogeneity between different quantiles for the impact of green innovation efficiency on carbon emissions, showing an "inverted U" shape, and its intensity in the context of medium carbon emissions is greater than that of low carbon and high carbon emissions.Entities:
Keywords: carbon dioxide emissions; carbon neutralization; carbon peak; green innovation efficiency
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36011882 PMCID: PMC9407693 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Green innovation efficiency index system.
| Primary Index | Secondary Index | Tertiary Indicators | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input indicators | Human capital | The full-time equivalent of R&D | 10,000 People |
| Capital investment | R&D capital stock | Hundred billion Chinese yuan | |
| Energy input | Total industrial energy consumption | 10,000 tons of standard coa | |
| Output indicators | Expected outputs | The amount of authorized green patents | Piece |
| Sales revenue of new products | Hundred billion Chinese yuan | ||
| Undesired outputs | Industrial waste gas | 10,000 tons | |
| Industrial wastewater discharge | Ton | ||
| Industrial smoke (powder) dust emission | Ton |
Figure 1Total carbon emissions and growth rate in the Yangtze River Delta and China.
Figure 2Proportion of carbon emissions from three provinces and one city in the Yangtze River Delta.
Figure 3Per capita carbon emission of three cities in the Yangtze River Delta.
Figure 4Carbon emission per GDP of three provinces and one city in Yangtze River Delta.
Benchmark regression results.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | I | II | III | IV | V |
| gie | −0.1811 *** | −0.3169 *** | −0.3158 *** | −0.0170 | −0.1341 * |
| pgdp | 0.0007 | 0.0033 * | 0.0026 | 0.0011 | |
| fdi | 0.0899 ** | 0.1001 ** | −0.2170 *** | −0.1121 ** | |
| pop_density | 0.2775 *** | 0.2110 *** | −0.0475 | −0.2479 | |
| produ_aver | 2.0783 *** | 1.7502 ** | 2.2988 *** | 1.2084 ** | |
| third_r | 2.5162 ** | 0.6468 | 1.9042 ** | −1.2504 * | |
| so2 | −1.36 × 10−7 | 7.08 × 10−8 | −1.73 × 10−7 | 2.12 × 10−7 * | |
| indu_dust | −1.41 × 10−8 | 4.65 × 10−8 * | −4.11 × 10−8 * | 1.86 × 10−8 | |
| indu_water | −217.5439 * | 217.04 * | −526.0929 *** | −269.1283 ** | |
| PM2.5 | −0.0007 | 0.0043 | −0.0143 ** | 0.0020 | |
| ti | 9.0269 *** | 4.6116 ** | 5.2227 * | 2.7080 | |
| firm_gs | 0.0001 *** | 0.0002 *** | 0.0001 * | 0.0001 ** | |
| greenland | 0.0458 | 0.1145 ** | 0.3065 *** | 0.0788 | |
| year | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| area | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| obs | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 |
| R2 | 0.0028 | 0.7928 | 0.7285 | 0.5229 | 0.3271 |
Note: *, **, *** are statistical significance at 10%, 5% and 1%, respectively. The numbers in parentheses represent the value of T.
Results of two-stage least squares estimation.
| Variable | I | II | III |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instrumental | 0.4824 *** | - | - |
| gie | - | −0.3729 ** | −0.1646 ** |
| pgdp | −0.0022 | 0.0035 | 0.0018 |
| fdi | 0.1250 *** | 0.0143 | −0.0985 ** |
| pop_density | −0.1219 * | 0.3424 *** | −0.0105 |
| produ_aver | 0.1927 | 1.9349 *** | 0.7337 * |
| third_r | −0.7287 * | 2.9064 *** | −1.3794 * |
| so2 | −2.74 × 10−7 ** | −1.36 × 10−7 | 2.33 × 10−7 ** |
| indu_dust | −7.17 × 10−9 | −1.47 × 10−8 | 2.28 × 10−8 |
| indu_water | −296.1486 *** | −217.5439 * | −264.6146 * |
| pm2.5 | −0.0013 | −0.0007 | −0.0004 |
| ti | 1.167022 | 9.0269 *** | 2.67374 |
| firm_gs | 0.0001 ** | 0.0001 *** | 0.0001 * |
| greenland | −0.1616 *** | 0.0458 | 0.0503 |
| year | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| area | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| obs | 400 | 400 | 340 |
| R2 | - | 0.7462 | 0.3255 |
Note: *, **, *** are statistical significance at 10%, 5% and 1%, respectively. The numbers in parentheses represent the value of T.
Regional heterogeneity analysis.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| gie | −0.1811 *** | −0.0034 | −0.1536 * | −0.1144 * |
| control variables | control | control | control | control |
| year | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| area | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| obs | 10 | 120 | 110 | 160 |
| Centered R2 | 0.0028 | 0.9587 | 0.9516 | 0.9538 |
Note: *, *** are statistical significance at 10%, and 1%, respectively. The numbers in parentheses represent the value of T.
Results of panel quantile regression.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| gie | −0.185 * | −0.278 *** | −0.294 ** | −0.313 ** | −0.347 *** | −0.361 *** | −0.359 *** | −0.333 *** | −0.272 ** |
| control variables | control | control | control | control | control | control | control | control | control |
| year | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| area | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| obs | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 |
| Pseudo R2 | 0.5714 | 0.5670 | 0.5564 | 0.5514 | 0.5633 | 0.5839 | 0.6051 | 0.6142 | 0.6298 |
Note: *, **, *** are statistical significance at 10%, 5% and 1%, respectively. The numbers in parentheses represent the value of T.
Figure 5The coefficients of gie in quantile regression.