| Literature DB >> 36141499 |
Xinyu Zhang1, Mufei Shen1, Yupeng Luan1, Weijia Cui1, Xueqin Lin1.
Abstract
Climate warming caused by carbon emissions is a hot topic in the international community. Research on urban industrial carbon emissions in China is of great significance for promoting the low-carbon transformation and spatial layout optimization of Chinese industry. Based on ArcGIS spatial analysis, Markov matrix and other methods, this paper calculates and analyzes the temporal and spatial evolution characteristics of industrial carbon emissions in 282 cities in China from 2003 to 2016. Based on the spatial Dubin model, the influencing factors of urban industrial carbon emissions in China and different regions are systematically analyzed. The study shows that (1) China's urban industrial carbon emissions generally show a trend of first growth and then slow decline. The trend of urban industrial carbon emissions in the western, central, northeastern and eastern regions of China is basically consistent with the overall national trend; (2) In 2003, China's urban industrial carbon emissions were dominated by low carbon emissions. In 2016, China's urban industrial carbon emissions were dominated by high carbon emissions, and the spatial trend is gradually decreasing from the eastern region to the central region to the northeast region to the western region; (3) In 2003, the evolution pattern of China's urban industrial carbon emissions was "low carbon-horizontal expansion" dominated by positive growth, and in 2016, it was "low carbon-vertical expansion" dominated by scale growth; (4) China's urban industrial carbon emissions have spatial viscosity, and the spatial viscosity decreases with the increase of industrial carbon emissions. (5) In 2004, the relationship between urban industrial carbon emissions and gross industrial output value in China is mainly weak decoupling. In 2016, various types of decoupling regions are more diversified and dispersed, and strong decoupling cities are mainly formed from weak decoupling cities in southwest China and eastern coastal areas; (6) From a national perspective, indicators that are significantly positively correlated with industrial carbon emissions are urban industrial structure, industrial agglomeration level, industrial enterprise scale and urban economic development level, in descending order. Indicators that are significantly negatively correlated with urban industrial carbon emissions are industrial structure and industrial ownership structure, in descending order. Due to the different stages of industrial development and industrial structure in different regions, the influencing factors are also different.Entities:
Keywords: China; influencing factors; spatial Dubin model; spatial evolution characteristics; urban industrial carbon emissions
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36141499 PMCID: PMC9517538 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191811227
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Decoupling type partition table.
| Decoupling Type | Industrial Carbon Emissions Increment | Total Industrial Output Increment | Decoupling Elasticity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decoupling | Strong decoupling | <0 | >0 | <0 |
| Weak decoupling | >0 | >0 | 0 < | |
| Negative decoupling | >0 | >0 | ||
| >0 | <0 | |||
| <0 | <0 | 0 < | ||
| Recessive decoupling | <0 | <0 | ||
Figure 1Theoretical framework of influencing factors of China’s urban industrial carbon emissions.
Figure 2Study area. Note: Produced on the Ministry of Natural Resources Standard Map Service website GS (2019)1823, with no modifications to the base map boundaries.
Figure 3Temporal variation of industrial carbon emissions at city level in China from 2003 to 2016.
Figure 4Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions in 2003 and 2016. (a) Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions in 2003. (b) Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions in 2016.
Figure 5Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions growth types in 2004 and 2016. (a) Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions growth types in 2004. (b) Spatial evolution of urban industrial carbon emissions growth types in 2016. (c) Urban industrial carbon emissions and growth rate in 2004. (d) Urban industrial carbon emissions and growth rate in 2016.
Markov matrix for urban industrial carbon emissions of China in 2003–2016.
| Period | t/t + 1 | Low | Lower | Median | High | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003–2007 | Low | 0.7949 | 0.1399 | 0.0652 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| Lower | 0.0457 | 0.6981 | 0.2355 | 0.0207 | 0.0000 | |
| Median | 0.0000 | 0.0369 | 0.6797 | 0.2462 | 0.0372 | |
| High | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0763 | 0.5974 | 0.3263 | |
| Higher | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0193 | 0.0445 | 0.7362 | |
| 2007–2012 | Low | 0.8307 | 0.1693 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| Lower | 0.0521 | 0.7978 | 0.1377 | 0.0124 | 0.0000 | |
| Median | 0.0000 | 0.084 | 0.7571 | 0.1552 | 0.0037 | |
| High | 0.0000 | 0.0057 | 0.0844 | 0.6985 | 0.2114 | |
| Higher | 0.0000 | 0.0153 | 0.0282 | 0.0891 | 0.8674 | |
| 2012–2016 | Low | 0.7962 | 0.1596 | 0.0442 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| Lower | 0.0829 | 0.7771 | 0.1214 | 0.0186 | 0.0000 | |
| Median | 0.0042 | 0.0983 | 0.7502 | 0.1372 | 0.0101 | |
| High | 0.0000 | 0.0104 | 0.132 | 0.7124 | 0.1452 | |
| Higher | 0.0000 | 0.0092 | 0.0352 | 0.1285 | 0.8271 |
Figure 6Distribution map of decoupling elasticity of China’s urban industrial carbon emissions in 2004 and 2016. (a) Distribution map of decoupling elasticity of China’s urban industrial carbon emissions in 2004. (b) Distribution map of decoupling elasticity of China’s urban industrial carbon emissions in 2016.
Results of the SDM model on the influencing factors of China’s urban industrial carbon emissions from 2003 to 2016.
| Variable | National | Eastern Region | Central Region | Western Region | Northeast Region | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | T | Coefficient | T | Coefficient | T | Coefficient | T | Coefficient | T | |
| ln | 0.2530 *** | (13.70) | 0.2640 *** | (9.35) | 0.3170 *** | (10.34) | 0.1450 *** | (4.86) | 0.5610 *** | (8.15) |
| ln | 1.810 *** | (23.54) | 1.440 *** | (11.24) | 0.5550 *** | (4.20) | 2.0250 *** | (15.85) | 1.3190 *** | (5.85) |
| ln | 0.2650 *** | (19.87) | 0.1180 *** | (4.98) | 0.1850 *** | (8.79) | 0.3310 *** | (13.60) | 0.1080 *** | (3.41) |
| ln | −0.2040 *** | (−4.80) | −0.5580 *** | (−6.03) | 0.0268 | (0.40) | −0.0068 | (−0.10) | −0.1400 | (−1.56) |
| ln | 0.0414 | (1.65) | 0.0512 | (1.34) | 0.0932 ** | (2.94) | 0.0617 | (1.30) | −0.0437 | (−0.53) |
| ln | −0.0903 | (−1.29) | −0.1910 * | (−2.00) | −0.4360 *** | (−3.80) | 0.1440 | (0.96) | −0.1780 | (−1.38) |
| ln | 0.3360 *** | (27.08) | 0.7080 *** | (29.58) | 0.7160 *** | (22.58) | 0.2050 *** | (11.25) | 0.5700 *** | (12.61) |
| ln | −0.1140 *** | (−4.33) | −0.0166 | (−0.29) | −0.0917 * | (−2.31) | −0.1040 * | (−2.19) | −0.1440 ** | (−3.03) |
| ln | 0.0235 | (0.94) | 0.0125 | (0.35) | 0.0837 * | (2.47) | 0.0496 | (1.11) | −0.0581 | (−0.74) |
| ln | 0.0180 | (0.34) | 0.0104 | (0.14) | 0.3330 | (1.82) | 0.0302 | (0.41) | −0.2480 | (−1.21) |
| W*ln | −0.1730 *** | (−6.43) | −0.0579 | (−1.34) | −0.4670 *** | (−8.22) | −0.0509 | (−1.18) | −1.2810 *** | (−9.31) |
| W*ln | −1.7360 *** | (−15.43) | −0.8390 *** | (−4.39) | −0.1270 | (−0.61) | −1.5180 *** | (−7.54) | 0.7780 | (1.64) |
| W*ln | −0.1620 *** | (−7.78) | 0.0340 | (0.95) | −0.0341 | (−1.10) | −0.2020 *** | (−5.47) | 0.0503 | (0.84) |
| W*ln | 0.2550 *** | (3.38) | 0.0310 | (0.18) | 0.0456 | (0.35) | 0.1300 | (1.03) | 0.6470 *** | (3.56) |
| W*ln | −0.3290 *** | (−7.00) | −0.1540 * | (−2.12) | −0.1490 * | (−2.20) | −0.2230 ** | (−2.62) | 0.0795 | (0.42) |
| W*ln | 0.2740 | (1.92) | 0.1610 | (0.89) | −0.4420 | (−1.51) | 0.7230 ** | (2.59) | 0.6270 * | (2.10) |
| W*ln | −0.1080 *** | (−7.07) | −0.4750 *** | (−11.44) | −0.5660 *** | (−9.91) | −0.0425 * | (−2.07) | −0.5970 *** | (−6.14) |
| W*ln | 0.0296 | (0.64) | 0.1440 | (1.24) | −0.1090 | (−1.45) | −0.1440 | (−1.69) | −0.3850 *** | (−4.07) |
| W*ln | −0.0851 | (−1.79) | −0.0114 | (−0.17) | −0.2010 ** | (−2.68) | −0.0985 | (−1.18) | 0.1900 | (1.41) |
| W*ln | 0.3790 *** | (3.43) | 0.1290 | (0.83) | 0.8210 * | (2.25) | 0.3860 * | (2.17) | 1.1180 *** | (3.44) |
| Spatial_rho | 0.4890 *** | (29.09) | 0.4460 *** | (13.52) | 0.5470 *** | (18.97) | 0.4880 *** | (17.61) | 0.3510 *** | (6.53) |
| Variance sigma2_e | 0.0228 *** | (43.61) | 0.0110 *** | (24.07) | 0.0101 *** | (22.92) | 0.0282 *** | (23.43) | 0.0149 *** | (15.24) |
| r2 | 0.238 | 0.496 | 0.289 | 0.422 | 0.0574 | |||||
Note: ***, **, and * denote significance levels of 1%, 5%, and 10%, respectively.