| Literature DB >> 36141807 |
Jieping Chen1, Xianpeng Long1, Shanlang Lin1.
Abstract
Although the special economic zones (SEZs) are considered the backbone of rapid economic development in China, it is unclear whether they contribute to green economic development. From the perspective of the localized industrial chains formed as a result of the SEZ policy, this paper aims to analyze and explain how the development of SEZs influences carbon emissions in Chinese cities by promoting green technologies' vertical spillover along the industrial chain. Based on the panel data of 264 prefecture-level cities from 2011 to 2016 and a relatively new and mostly disaggregated city-level MRIO (multi-region input-output) table in China, this paper constructs green technology vertical spillover as a mechanism variable and discusses the influence theoretically and empirically. The results show that the development of SEZs can reduce a city's carbon emissions. More specifically, for every 10 m2 increase in the size of the SEZ area, the carbon dioxide emission can be reduced by 0.882 g per m2 of the city area. Moreover, mechanism analysis shows that the development of SEZs promotes green technology vertical spillover inside the city, through which the SEZs reduce the city's carbon emissions. The mediation effect occupies 21.96% of the total effect. Furthermore, the impact of the development of SEZs on carbon emissions has regional heterogeneity due to the city's industry structure, green technology stocks, and the zones' administrative hierarchies. The finding of this study could provide several important implications for regional green development, especially in China.Entities:
Keywords: carbon emissions; green technology; localized industry chain; multi-region input–output (MRIO) table; special economic zones (SEZs); vertical spillovers
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36141807 PMCID: PMC9517319 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191811535
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Research framework (Source: Own creation).
Figure 2Distribution of two types of ETDZs in 264 prefecture-level cities in China (left: provincial-level zones; right: national-level zones). Source: Own creation, results of ArcGis (Esri, Redlands, CA, USA).
Descriptive statistics and data sources.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables |
| Max | Min | Mean | Sd | Data Sources |
|
| 1584 | 357.5 | 0.731 | 32.95 | 36.91 | China Energy Statistics Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 78.60 | 0 | 5.484 | 7.294 | China Development Zone Review Announcement Catalogue (2018) |
|
| 1584 | 607.0 | 0.000424 | 12.32 | 39.86 | MRIO table [ |
|
| 1584 | 50.63 | 0.618 | 5.316 | 5.078 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 89.30 | 14.90 | 49.45 | 10.11 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 1.048 | 0.000627 | 0.0176 | 0.0433 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 1.876 | 0 | 0.283 | 0.276 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 14.58 | 0.0481 | 1.875 | 1.697 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
|
| 1584 | 26.48 | 0.0509 | 4.413 | 3.421 | China City Statistical Yearbook |
Source: Own creation, results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Baseline regression results (Model 1).
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| −1.003 *** | −0.953 *** | −0.921 *** | −0.937 *** | −0.938 *** | −0.914 *** | −0.882 ** |
| (−2.80) | (−2.72) | (−2.70) | (−2.76) | (−2.76) | (−2.66) | (−2.52) | |
|
| −0.302 | −0.488 * | −0.344 | −0.344 | −0.148 | −0.182 | |
| (−1.17) | (−1.81) | (−1.22) | (−1.22) | (−0.45) | (−0.55) | ||
|
| 0.120 *** | 0.112 *** | 0.113 *** | 0.095 *** | 0.080 *** | ||
| (4.64) | (4.35) | (4.28) | (2.99) | (2.67) | |||
|
| −11.315 *** | −11.293 *** | −11.885 *** | −29.918 *** | |||
| (−2.72) | (−2.71) | (−2.87) | (−3.40) | ||||
|
| −0.099 | −0.192 | 0.049 | ||||
| (−0.25) | (−0.50) | (0.12) | |||||
|
| −0.569 | −0.360 | |||||
| (−1.32) | (−0.77) | ||||||
|
| 3.608 *** | ||||||
| (2.88) | |||||||
|
| 38.447 *** | 39.778 *** | 34.662 *** | 34.566 *** | 34.572 *** | 35.387 *** | 20.049 *** |
| (19.51) | (16.12) | (15.14) | (15.12) | (15.08) | (14.84) | (3.05) | |
|
| 1584 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 |
|
| 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 |
|
| 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.996 |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; *, **, *** indicate p-value 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
DID regression results (Model 4).
| Variables | (1) | (2) | (3) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| −175.390 ** | −152.985 ** | |
| (−2.50) | (−2.11) | ||
|
| −129.875 | ||
| (−1.10) | |||
|
| −132.027 | ||
| (−1.03) | |||
|
| −248.595 ** | ||
| (−2.22) | |||
|
| −172.852 * | ||
| (−1.69) | |||
|
| −154.308 * | ||
| (−1.85) | |||
|
| 8387.736 *** | 12,356.931 *** | 8545.559 *** |
| (239.20) | (8.81) | (168.09) | |
|
| 1566 | 1566 | 522 |
|
| 261 | 261 | 261 |
|
| 0.987 | 0.988 | 0.0256 |
|
| NO | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; *, **, *** indicate p-value 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Mechanism examination results.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
| 5.083 *** | 3.459 *** | −0.751 *** | −0.718 ** |
| (3.82) | (3.04) | (−2.62) | (−2.53) | |
|
| −0.049 *** | −0.056 *** | ||
| (−4.31) | (−3.55) | |||
|
| −15.555 ** | −37.213 *** | 37.678 *** | 16.731 ** |
| (−2.13) | (−3.64) | (22.90) | (2.57) | |
|
| 1584 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 |
|
| 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 |
|
| 0.903 | 0.930 | 0.996 | 0.996 |
|
| NO | YES | NO | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; **, *** indicate p-value 5% and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Results of robustness check.
| (1) Exclude the Sample of Cities without New Zones |
| (3) Change the Indicator for | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| −1.003 *** | 4.007 *** | −0.767 *** | −0.886 ** | 3.458 *** | −0.721 ** | −0.882 ** | 1.961 ** | −0.768 *** |
| (−2.72) | (3.57) | (−2.86) | (−2.53) | (3.02) | (−2.54) | (−2.52) | (2.35) | (−2.59) | |
|
| −0.066 *** | −0.057 *** | −0.068 *** | ||||||
| (−2.75) | (−3.56) | (−3.19) | |||||||
|
| 20.961 *** | −35.458 *** | 17.682 ** | 16.196 ** | −22.425 ** | 13.559 ** | 20.049 *** | −33.162 *** | 17.043 *** |
| (2.92) | (−3.50) | (2.50) | (2.56) | (−2.47) | (2.13) | (3.05) | (−4.51) | (2.63) | |
|
| 1182 | 1182 | 1182 | 1566 | 1566 | 1566 | 1584 | 1584 | 1584 |
|
| 197 | 197 | 197 | 261 | 261 | 261 | 264 | 264 | 264 |
|
| 0.997 | 0.935 | 0.997 | 0.996 | 0.930 | 0.996 | 0.996 | 0.917 | 0.996 |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; **, *** indicate p-value 5% and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Endogeneity test.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Stage | First Stage | Second Stage | Second Stage | Second Stage | |
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| −0.005 *** | ||||
| (−6.03) | |||||
|
| −0.003 *** | ||||
| (−3.63) | |||||
|
| −0.001 | ||||
| (−1.00) | |||||
|
| −0.001 | ||||
| (−1.41) | |||||
|
| −0.001 | ||||
| (−0.67) | |||||
|
| 1.022 *** | ||||
| (162.35) | |||||
|
| −5.181 *** | 11.168 ** | −4.539 *** | ||
| (−4.22) | (2.56) | (−3.77) | |||
|
| −0.055 *** | ||||
| (−5.09) | |||||
|
| 1584 | 1320 | 1320 | 1320 | 1320 |
|
| 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 |
|
| 10.18 | 5348.76 | |||
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; **, *** indicate p-value 5%, and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Heterogeneity analysis by industry structure grouping.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low-Ratio Group | High-Ratio Group | |||||
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| −0.035 | 0.515 ** | 0.058 | −1.323 *** | 4.404 *** | −1.144 *** |
| (−0.36) | (2.54) | (0.45) | (−2.80) | (2.89) | (−2.79) | |
|
| −0.209 * | −0.044 *** | ||||
| (−1.93) | (−3.42) | |||||
|
| −1.194 | −4.408 * | −3.353 | 34.007 *** | −57.654 *** | 30.715 *** |
| (−0.12) | (−1.70) | (−0.32) | (4.90) | (−2.73) | (4.44) | |
|
| 780 | 780 | 780 | 765 | 765 | 765 |
|
| 169 | 169 | 169 | 174 | 174 | 174 |
|
| 0.995 | 0.899 | 0.995 | 0.996 | 0.931 | 0.997 |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; *, **, *** indicate p-value 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Heterogeneity analysis by green technology stock grouping.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low Green Technology Stock Group | High Green Technology Stock Group | |||||
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| −0.127 | 0.694 *** | −0.025 | −1.187 *** | 3.812 *** | −1.038 *** |
| (−1.10) | (2.79) | (−0.20) | (−2.77) | (2.72) | (−2.82) | |
|
| −0.159 *** | −0.043 *** | ||||
| (−2.59) | (−3.35) | |||||
|
| −15.281 | −3.261 | −16.967 * | 46.813 *** | −69.387 *** | 43.287 *** |
| (−1.49) | (−1.36) | (−1.66) | (7.63) | (−3.35) | (7.36) | |
|
| 860 | 860 | 860 | 715 | 715 | 715 |
|
| 167 | 167 | 167 | 147 | 147 | 147 |
|
| 0.994 | 0.771 | 0.994 | 0.997 | 0.932 | 0.997 |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; *, *** indicate p-value 10% and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).
Heterogeneity analysis by administration hierarchy.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Zones | Provincial Zones | |||||
| Variables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| −1.904 *** | 7.057 *** | −1.589 *** | −0.360 | 1.723 | −0.282 |
| (−2.85) | (4.19) | (−2.73) | (−1.01) | (1.24) | (−0.94) | |
|
| −0.051 *** | −0.063 *** | ||||
| (−3.77) | (−3.19) | |||||
|
| 18.242 *** | −30.601 *** | 15.529 ** | 16.903 *** | −24.024 ** | 13.789 ** |
| (2.84) | (−3.45) | (2.39) | (2.60) | (−2.33) | (2.13) | |
|
| 1566 | 1566 | 1566 | 1566 | 1566 | 1566 |
|
| 261 | 261 | 261 | 261 | 261 | 261 |
|
| 0.996 | 0.932 | 0.997 | 0.996 | 0.927 | 0.996 |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
|
| YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES |
Note: Robust t-statistics in parentheses; **, *** indicate p-value 5% and 1%, respectively. Source: Own creation, regression results of Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).