| Literature DB >> 36078433 |
Weicheng Xu1,2, Zhendong Zhang1.
Abstract
The increasing marine pollution in China's coastal areas has seriously affected the sustainable development of the economy and the living standards of residents. It is of great significance to explore the relationship between urbanization and marine pollution in coastal areas for the sustainable development of coastal cities. Based on the marine pollution data and nighttime light (NTL) data of 46 coastal cities from 2006 to 2015, the paper discusses the impact of urbanization on marine pollution by using the generalized spatial two-stage least square method (GS2SlS), and analyzes the role of technological innovation, financial development, and human capital in the impact of urbanization on marine pollution by using the three-stage least square method (3SLS). Results show that China's coastal marine pollution has a strong spatial spillover effect, and a U-shaped relationship exists between urbanization and marine pollution. Regional heterogeneity analysis shows that an inverted U-shaped relationship was found between coastal urbanization and marine pollution in the northern marine economic circle, while the eastern and southern marine economic circles have a U-shaped correlation. The heterogeneity of the urbanization pattern indicates that the relationship between different urbanization patterns and marine pollution in coastal areas is generally in a positive correlation stage, but the depth of urbanization occupies a dominant position. Further mechanism tests show that urbanization can effectively reduce coastal marine pollution and improve the marine environment through the technological innovation effect, financial development effect, and human capital effect.Entities:
Keywords: marine pollution; mechanism analysis; nighttime light data; spatial spillover effect; urbanization
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36078433 PMCID: PMC9518363 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710718
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Summary of main relevant literature based on the Chinese case.
| Author(s) | Pollution Indicators | Methods | Data | Main Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu, X. | Environmental pollution composite index | Dynamic spatial Durbin model | China; | There is no EKC between urbanization and environmental pollution in China, and urbanization will increase local environmental pollution. |
| Yu, B. [ | Comprehensive pollution emission index | Dynamic spatial panel model | China; | China’s new-type of urbanization has not only effectively reduced pollution emissions and improved energy efficiency but has also been significant in terms of its ecological effects. |
| Liang, W. | Regional wastewater discharge | Urbanization economic growth model and simultaneous equation model | China; | Environmental pollution has a significant inhibitory effect on urbanization; and there is an inverted U curve between urbanization and environmental pollution. |
| Shao, Q. | Per capita volume of industrial wastewater discharged directly into the sea | Panel vector | China; | Marine economic and urbanization lead to marine pollution. Moreover, urban expansion aggravates marine environmental damage. |
| Chen, J. | Red-tide disaster areas by coastal region | Tapio elasticity | China; | The research reaches an inverted N-shaped relationship between the marine economy and marine pollution in China. |
| Shao, Q. [ | Industrial wastewater discharged directly into the sea | Panel threshold model | China; | The results reveal that the increase in per capita GOP strongly promotes marine pollution across the three phases of the panel threshold model, implying that China is still located in the first half of the EKC, before the peak. |
Note: The order of literature in Table A1 is consistent with that in the paper.
Figure 1Spatial distribution of 46 coastal cities belonging to three marine economic circles.
Descriptive statistics.
| Variable Type | Variable Name | Symbol | Obs | Mean | S.D. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Explained variables | Marine pollution |
| 460 | −1.910 | 0.660 | −3.743 | −0.017 |
| Explanatory variables | Urbanization |
| 460 | 0.977 | 2.370 | −6.048 | 7.117 |
| Quadratic term of |
| 460 | 6.558 | 9.886 | 0.001 | 50.652 | |
| Control variables | Economic growth |
| 460 | 10.635 | 0.624 | 8.869 | 13.056 |
| Quadratic term of |
| 460 | 113.482 | 13.276 | 78.656 | 170.451 | |
| Population density |
| 460 | 6.298 | 0.546 | 4.890 | 7.882 | |
| Energy efficiency |
| 460 | 11.992 | 0.582 | 10.599 | 13.653 | |
| Industrial structure |
| 460 | −0.720 | 0.210 | −1.648 | −0.215 | |
| Degree of openness to the outside world |
| 460 | −3.843 | 0.989 | −6.650 | −2.028 | |
| Government |
| 460 | −2.418 | 0.371 | −3.405 | −1.494 | |
| Marine economic |
| 460 | 8.746 | 0.721 | 6.457 | 10.410 | |
| Intermediate variables | Technological |
| 460 | 0.725 | 1.895 | −5.088 | 6.362 |
| Financial development level |
| 460 | 0.296 | 0.365 | −0.611 | 1.370 | |
| Human capital |
| 460 | 0.116 | 1.122 | −2.221 | 2.483 |
Global Moran’s I of marine pollution from 2006 to 2015.
| Year | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moran’s I | 0.365 | 0.457 | 0.184 | 0.405 | 0.439 |
| 0.008 | 0.001 | 0.134 | 0.003 | 0.001 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Moran’s I | 0.335 | 0.436 | 0.430 | 0.445 | 0.581 |
| 0.008 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Figure 2Moran scatterplots of marine pollution: (a) Moran scatterplot of in 2006; (b) Moran scatterplot of in 2009; (c) Moran scatterplot of in 2012; (d) Moran scatterplot of in 2015.
Spatial GS2SLS model regression results.
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FE | RE | FE | RE | |
|
| 0.085 ** | 0.056 ** | 0.102 *** | 0.077 *** |
|
| 0.012 * | 0.009 * | 0.018 * | 0.016 ** |
|
| 0.011 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.009 ** | 0.011 *** |
|
| −0.738 *** | −0.845 *** | −0.833 *** | −0.967 *** |
|
| 0.034 *** | 0.041 *** | 0.041 *** | 0.047 *** |
|
| 0.154 | 0.250 ** | 0.116 | 0.203 ** |
|
| 0.099 * | 0.096 * | 0.093 * | 0.089 ** |
|
| −0.061 | 0.067 | −0.200 | 0.088 |
|
| 0.043 * | 0.039 * | ||
|
| −0.188 * | −0.203 ** | ||
|
| 0.052 | 0.056 | ||
| Constant | −0.080 | −0.092 | −0.080 | −0.082 |
| N | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 |
| Wald test (p) | 667.999 | 624.583 | 680.351 | 602.647 |
| Inflection point (urban) | 0.580 | 0.687 | 0.368 | 0.483 |
| Hausman test (p) | 51.308 (0.000) | 16.230 (0.131) | ||
Note: *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error; FE and RE represent fixed effect and random effect, respectively.
Figure 3Nonlinear scatterplot of urbanization and marine pollution.
Figure 4U-shaped curve between urbanization and marine pollution.
The results of robustness tests.
| Variables | Replace | Displace Space Matrix | Replace Instrumental Variables | Change Sample Size | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | |
| FE | RE | FE | RE | FE | RE | FE | RE | |
|
| 0.102 *** | 0.075 *** | 0.097 *** | 0.072 *** | 0.103 *** | 0.093 *** | ||
|
| 0.944 *** | 0.894 *** | ||||||
|
| 0.080 * | 0.082 ** | 0.071 * | 0.082 ** | 0.060 * | 0.061 * | 0.016 * | 0.013 * |
|
| 0.044 *** | 0.049 *** | 0.039 *** | 0.054 *** | 0.044 *** | 0.050 *** | 0.008 ** | 0.010 *** |
| N | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 440 | 440 |
| Control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Hausman test (p) | 13.830 (0.243) | 23.529 (0.015) | 13.830 (0.243) | 17.805 (0.058) | ||||
Note: *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error; FE and RE represent fixed effect and random effect, respectively.
Regression results of regional heterogeneity analysis.
| Variables | Northern Marine | Eastern Marine | Southern Marine Economic Circle | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
| FE | RE | FE | RE | FE | RE | |
|
| −0.110 *** | −0.018 *** | 0.251 *** | 0.226 *** | 0.031 | 0.047 |
|
| 0.044 * | 0.042 ** | −0.113 *** | −0.002 | 0.029 ** | 0.032 * |
|
| −0.042 ** | −0.035 ** | 0.020 ** | 0.009 | 0.009 ** | 0.005 |
| Constant | −1.036 | −2.198 | 1.084 | 0.397 | 0.396 | 0.139 |
| N | 160 | 160 | 90 | 90 | 210 | 210 |
| Control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Hausman test (p) | 7.039 (0.796) | −112.252 (0.000) | 115.003 (0.000) | |||
Note: *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error; FE and RE represent fixed effect and random effect, respectively.
Figure 5The curves between urbanization and marine pollution in different regions.
Regression results of different urbanization patterns in national coastal cities.
| Variables | Urbanization Depth | Urbanization Breadth | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
| FE | RE | FE | RE | |
|
| 0.099 *** | 0.073 *** | 0.100 *** | 0.076 *** |
|
| 0.121 ** | 0.127 *** | ||
|
| 0.050 *** | 0.055 *** | ||
|
| −0.015 * | −0.029 * | ||
|
| 0.026 ** | 0.034 *** | ||
| Constant | −0.084 | −0.085 | −0.065 | −0.067 |
| N | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 |
| Control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Inflection point (urban) | 0.298 | 0.315 | 1.334 | 1.532 |
| Hausman test (p) | 9.990 (0.531) | 19.674 (0.050) | ||
Note: *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error; FE and RE represent fixed effect and random effect, respectively.
Figure 6The curves of urbanization patterns and marine pollution in national coastal cities.
Regression results of different urbanization patterns in eastern marine economic circle.
| Variables | Urbanization Depth | Urbanization Breadth | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
| FE | RE | FE | RE | FE | RE | |
|
| 0.212 *** | 0.269 *** | 0.215 *** | 0.212 *** | 0.270 *** | 0.246 *** |
|
| 0.001 | −0.093 ** | ||||
|
| 0.044 | 0.107 *** | ||||
|
| −0.022 | −0.211 *** | −0.08 ** | −0.269 *** | ||
|
| 0.016 | 0.046 ** | −0.005 | 0.014 | ||
|
| 0.013 ** | 0.017 ** | ||||
| constant | 0.320 | 0.617 | 0.339 | 1.185 | 0.388 | 1.053 |
| N | 90 | 90 | 90 | 90 | 90 | 90 |
| Control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Inflection point (urban) | 0.989 | 0.648 | 1.989 | 9.91 | 0.270/4.788 | 0.087/8.787 |
| Hausman test (p) | −16.717 (0.117) | −184.966 (0.000) | −330.604 (0.000) | |||
Note: ** and *** indicate significance at the 5% and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error; FE and RE represent fixed effect and random effect, respectively.
Figure 7The curve of urbanization patterns and marine pollution in eastern marine economic circle.
The results of mechanism analysis.
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| −0.772 * | ||||||||
|
| −0.967 ** | ||||||||
|
| −1.353 * | ||||||||
|
| 0.295 ** | 0.022 ** | 0.168 ** | ||||||
|
| 1.045 *** | 1.045 *** | 1.045 *** | ||||||
| N | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 | 460 |
| R2 | 0.702 | 0.970 | 0.933 | 0.855 | 0.970 | 0.933 | 0.707 | 0.965 | 0.933 |
Note: *, **, and *** indicate significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively. Figures in () are standard error.