| Literature DB >> 36231720 |
Ke Mao1,2, Pierre Failler3.
Abstract
In recent years, the expansion of local government debt (LGD) in China has caused widespread concern. Enhancing green total factor productivity (GTFP) is an important way to coordinate resources, environment, and regional development and is an important indicator to realize the transformation of green economic development. Scientific assessment of the impact of LGD on GTFP helps promote the transformation of green economic development. This paper selects sample data from 271 cities in China from 2010 to 2019 and empirically investigates the mechanisms of LGD, green innovation, and financial market development on GTFP. The results show that (1) LGD expansion significantly suppresses GTFP in China; (2) green innovation mediates between the two, and LGD suppresses GTFP by reducing the level of green innovation; and (3) financial market development can mitigate the negative impact of LGD on urban GTFP. Therefore, the governance of LGD should be strengthened, the financial market environment should be optimized, the distortion of financial resources should be corrected, and innovative financing modes such as green finance and green credit should be encouraged to enhance GTFP.Entities:
Keywords: financial market development; green innovation; green total factor productivity (GTFP); local government debt (LGD)
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36231720 PMCID: PMC9566037 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912425
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Definition of input and output metrics for GTFP calculations.
| First-Level Indicators | Second-Level Indicators | Definition |
|---|---|---|
| Inputs | Workforce | The total amount of employment in urban units at year-end |
| Capital Stock | Estimated by the perpetual inventory method | |
| Water Supply | Annual water supply | |
| Electricity Supply | Annual power generation | |
| Desirable outputs | GDP | Real gross domestic product measured in 2000 as the base period |
| Green Coverage | The percentage of built-up area that is covered by forest | |
| Undesirable outputs | Industrial Waste | The quantity of industrial wastewater dumped |
| Sulfur Dioxide Emissions | The quantity of industrial sulfur dioxide emitted | |
| Soot Emission | The quantity of industrial soot (dust) emitted |
Descriptive statistics.
| Variables Type | Variables | Obs. | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent Variable |
| 2710 | 1.010 | 0.029 | 0.960 | 1.067 |
| Independent Variable |
| 2710 | 0.129 | 0.147 | 0.000 | 0.984 |
| Mediating Variable |
| 2710 | 3.784 | 1.948 | 0.000 | 10.182 |
| Moderating Variable |
| 2710 | 0.978 | 0.636 | 0.118 | 9.623 |
| Controlled Variables |
| 2710 | 10.580 | 0.611 | 8.553 | 12.281 |
|
| 2710 | 0.408 | 0.102 | 0.098 | 0.835 | |
|
| 2710 | 0.028 | 0.027 | 0.000 | 0.194 | |
|
| 2710 | 0.889 | 0.125 | 0.001 | 1.501 | |
|
| 2710 | 5.707 | 0.863 | 2.356 | 8.137 | |
|
| 2710 | 16.927 | 7.269 | 1.419 | 60.070 |
Effect of LGD on GTFP.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| GTFP | GTFP | GTFP | |
| LGD | −0.106 *** | −0.043 *** | −0.035 *** |
| (0.007) | (0.010) | (0.011) | |
| PGDP | 0.210 *** | 0.189 *** | |
| (0.044) | (0.058) | ||
| IS | 0.844 *** | 0.825 *** | |
| (0.133) | (0.239) | ||
| FDI | 0.528 ** | 0.434 | |
| (0.211) | (0.319) | ||
| ER | 0.450 *** | 0.303 *** | |
| (0.071) | (0.097) | ||
| POP | −0.108 *** | −0.089 ** | |
| (0.029) | (0.041) | ||
| INFRA | 0.028 | 0.005 | |
| (0.037) | (0.045) | ||
| Cons | 1.024 *** | −1.823 *** | 0.950 *** |
| (0.021) | (0.016) | (0.111) | |
| N | 2710 | 2710 | 2710 |
| Year FE | No | No | Yes |
| City FE | No | No | Yes |
| Adj. R2 | 0.093 | 0.132 | 0.155 |
Note: Robustness standard errors are in parentheses, ***, **, * denote passing the test at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.
Robustness test.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alternative GTFP | GTFP | GTFP | GTFP | |
| LGD | −0.112 *** | −0.041 *** | ||
| (0.032) | (0.012) | |||
| LnLGD | −0.227 ** | |||
| (0.099) | ||||
| L. LGD | −0.041 *** | |||
| (0.013) | ||||
| Cons | 0.491 *** | 0.932 *** | 1.069 *** | 0.958 *** |
| (0.003) | (0.111) | (0.137) | (0.111) | |
| N | 2710 | 2710 | 2710 | 2670 |
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Year FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| City FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Adj. R2 | 0.226 | 0.158 | 0.168 | 0.156 |
Note: Robustness standard errors are in parentheses, ***, **, * denote passing the test at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.
Mediating effects test.
| (1) | (2) | |
|---|---|---|
| GI | GTFP | |
| LGD | −0.611 *** | −0.016 ** |
| (0.178) | (0.07) | |
| GI | 0.032 *** | |
| (0.010) | ||
| Cons | −5.899 *** | 0.948 *** |
| (1.610) | (0.112) | |
| N | 2710 | 2710 |
| Controls | Yes | Yes |
| Year FE | Yes | Yes |
| City FE | Yes | Yes |
| Adj. R2 | 0.679 | 0.256 |
Note: Robustness standard errors are in parentheses, ***, **, * denote passing the test at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.
Moderating effects test.
| (1) | |
|---|---|
| GTFP | |
| LGD | −0.048 * |
| (0.026) | |
| LGD | 0.018 ** |
| (0.009) | |
| Cons | 0.944 *** |
| (0.111) | |
| N | 2710 |
| Controls | Yes |
| Year FE | Yes |
| City FE | Yes |
| Adj. R2 | 0.164 |
Note: Robustness standard errors are in parentheses, ***, **, * denote passing the test at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.
Heterogeneity analysis.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| East | Central | Western | High | Low | |
| LGD | −0.028 | −0.040 ** | −0.045 *** | −0.078 *** | −0.020 |
| (0.015) | (0.017) | (0.012) | (0.028) | (0.020) | |
| Cons | 0.688 ** | 1.362 *** | 0.900 ** | 0.982 *** | 0.487 * |
| (0.288) | (0.217) | (0.414) | (0.140) | (0.286) | |
| N | 990 | 970 | 750 | 1640 | 1070 |
| Controls | Yes | Yes | Yes | Controls | Yes |
| Year FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| City FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Adj. R2 | 0.147 | 0.118 | 0.202 | 0.211 | 0.259 |
Note: Robustness standard errors are in parentheses, ***, **, * denote passing the test at 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, respectively.
China’s provincial administrative divisions (eastern, central, and western regions).
| Eastern Region | Central Region | Western Region |
|---|---|---|
| Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Shandong, Guangdong, Hainan; | Shanxi, Neimenggu, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Anhui, Jiangxi, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Guangxi; | Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, Xizang, Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia, Xinjiang; Total 9 provinces. |
Abbreviations and full name.
| Variables Type | Variables | Full Name |
|---|---|---|
| Dependent Variable | GTFP | Green total factor productivity |
| Independent Variable | LGD | Local government debt |
| Mediating Variable | GI | Green innovation |
| Moderating Variable | FMD | Financial market development |
| Controlled Variables | PGDP | Per capital GDP |
| INS | Industrial structure | |
| FDI | Foreign direct investment | |
| ER | Environment regulation | |
| POP | Population size | |
| INFRA | Infrastructure | |
| Reporting in Regression Models | Cons | Intercept term in the regression |
| N | Number of observations | |
| Year FE | Whether the year is fixed in the fixed effects model | |
| City FE | Whether the city is fixed in the fixed effects model | |
| Adj. R2 | Adjusted R-Squared | |
| Controls | Whether control variables are added |