| Literature DB >> 36232265 |
Can Zhang1, Jixia Li1, Tengfei Liu2, Mengzhi Xu1, Huachun Wang1, Xu Li3.
Abstract
In the "full world" where natural capital is scarce, within the limits of the ecological environment, the improvement of welfare is a fundamental requirement for sustainable development. The ecological wellbeing performance (EWP) of 284 cities in China from 2007 to 2020 was measured by the superefficient SBM-DEA model, considering undesirable output, and analyzing the evolutionary trends of overall comprehensive technical efficiency, pure technical efficiency, and scale efficiency. The Theil index was used to explore the source and distribution of the Chinese cities' EWP differences. Exploratory spatial data analysis (ESDA) and the spatial Durbin model (SDM) were applied to analyze the spatial distribution characteristics and driving factors of cities' EWP. The results showed the following: (1) Regarding spatial and temporal distribution, the EWP of Chinese cities showed a fluctuating upward trend, in which pure technical efficiency > scale efficiency. (2) Considering regional differences, the differences in cities' EWP were mainly intraregional rather than interregional. The contribution rates of distinct regions to the differences in EWP varied, i.e., western region > eastern region > central region > northeastern region. (3) In terms of spatial correlation, China's EWP showed positive spatial correlation, i.e., high-high agglomeration and low-low agglomeration. (4) Concerning influencing factors, the level of financial development, the structure of secondary industries, the level of opening-up, and the degree of urbanization significantly improved EWP. Decentralization of fiscal revenue significantly inhibited improvement of EWP. Decentralization of fiscal expenditure and technological progress had no significant impact on the EWP. In the future, to improve cities' EWP, China should focus on reducing differences in intraregional EWP, overcoming administrative regional limitations, encouraging regions with similar locations to formulate coordinated development plans, promoting economic growth, reducing levels of environmental pollution, and paying attention to the improvement of social welfare.Entities:
Keywords: Theil index; ecological welfare performance (EWP); influencing factors; regional differences; spatial Durbin model
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36232265 PMCID: PMC9566643 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912955
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Existing EWP studies.
| Scale | Authors | Objective Area | Method | Time Period |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Provincial | Yingjie Feng [ | 30 Chinese provinces | HDI/EF | 1994–2014 |
| Wang et al. [ | 30 Chinese provinces | 2006–2018 | ||
| Hou et al. [ | 30 Chinese provinces | Super SBM-DEA | 2006–2017 | |
| Jing Bian [ | 30 Chinese provinces | Super SBM-DEA | 2011–2016 | |
| City level | Hu et al. [ | 41 cities | Network DEA | 2001–2017 |
| Liu et al. [ | 171 Prefecture-level cities | Super SBM-DEA | 2010–2019 | |
| Xinyi Long [ | Four islands | HDI/EF | 2017 | |
| National level | Zhang et al. [ | 82 developed countries | 2012 | |
| Sweidan [ | Gulf countries | 1995–2012 |
Indicators of cities’ EWP.
| Dimension | First-Level Index Layer | Second-Level Index Layer | Third-Level Index Layer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input index | Resource input | Energy consumption | Total electricity consumption (100 million kwh) |
| Water resource consumption | Water consumption (100 million tons) | ||
| Land resource consumption | Built-up area (square kilometers) | ||
| Non-resource input | Labor input | Number of environmental protection personnel (people) | |
| Property input | Investment in fixed assets of cities’ public utilities construction (10,000 yuan) | ||
| Environmental protection expenditure (10,000 yuan) | |||
| Desirable output | Welfare level | Economic welfare | Cities’ GDP (100 million yuan) |
| Environmental welfare | Green space (hectares) | ||
| Social welfare | Years of education (years) | ||
| Number of doctors (people) | |||
| Cities’ road area at the end of the year (10,000 square meters) | |||
| Undesirable output | Environmental pollution | Wastewater discharge | Industrial wastewater discharge (10,000 tons) |
| Smoke and dust emissions | Industrial smoke and dust (tons) | ||
| Exhaust emissions | Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions (tons) | ||
| Carbon dioxide emissions (tons) |
Sources of variables.
| Variable | Data Sources | Variable | Data Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total electricity consumption | China Urban Statistical Yearbook | Green spaces | China Urban and Rural Construction Statistical Yearbook |
| Water consumption of the whole society | China Urban and Rural Construction Statistical Yearbook | Three industrial waste products | China Urban Statistical Yearbook |
| Built-up area | CO2 | Center for global environmental research | |
| Number of employees in water conservation, environment, and public facilities management | China Urban Statistical Yearbook | Deposits and loans | China Urban Statistical Yearbook |
| Public assets investment in municipal public facilities construction | China Urban and Rural Construction Statistical Yearbook | Industrial structure | China Urban Statistical Yearbook |
| Financial expenditure on energy conservation and environmental protection | Financial Bureau and Statistics Bureau apply for information disclosure | General budgetary revenues and expenditures of central and local governments | China Urban Statistical Yearbook |
| Per capita years of education | China Urban Statistical Yearbook | Patents | CNRDS database |
| Number of doctors | China Urban Statistical Yearbook | Foreign direct investment | China Urban Statistical Yearbook |
| Urban road area at the end of the year | China Urban Construction Statistical Yearbook |
Figure 1Division of four regions in China. Note: the map is drawn according to the Standard Map Service Website of the Ministry of natural resources (map review No. GS (2020) 4630).
Figure 2Research flow chart.
Figure 3Temporal evolution of the cities’ EWP from 2007 to 2020, and its decomposition.
Figure 4EWP of four regions in China from 2007 to 2020.
Figure 5Spatial distribution characteristics of Chinese cities’ EWP from 2007 to 2020. Note: the map is drawn according to the Standard Map Service Website of the Ministry of natural resources (map review No. GS (2020) 4630).
Figure 6Theil index of cities’ EWP in China from 2007 to 2020.
Figure 7Theil index contribution rate of cities’ EWP in different regions from 2007 to 2020.
Global Moran index of urban EWP in China from 2007 to 2020.
| 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | 0.042 | 0.044 | 0.028 | 0.033 | 0.037 | 0.050 | 0.031 | 0.033 | 0.023 | 0.008 | 0.016 | −0.003 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Z | 8.798 | 9.288 | 6.241 | 7.043 | 7.984 | 10.483 | 6.757 | 7.053 | 5.193 | 2.173 | 3.752 | 0.177 | 1.513 | 2.200 |
| P | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.030 | 0.000 | 0.859 | 0.130 | 0.028 |
Figure 8LISA clustering diagram of Chinese cities EWP in 2007, 2010, 2015, and 2020 using the inverse distance matrix. Note: the map is drawn according to the Standard Map Service Website of the Ministry of natural resources (map review No. GS (2020) 4630).
Descriptive statistical analysis.
| Var Name | Obs | Mean | SD | Min | Median | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EWP | 3976 | 0.863 | 0.192 | 0.299 | 0.866 | 1.798 |
| FINANCE | 3976 | 2.291 | 1.109 | 0.560 | 1.966 | 8.052 |
| STRU | 3976 | 3.177 | 10.090 | 0.107 | 0.489 | 67.420 |
| FISCAL REVENUE DEC | 3976 | 0.386 | 0.165 | 0.050 | 0.363 | 0.834 |
| FISCAL EXPEN DEC | 3976 | 0.789 | 0.071 | 0.491 | 0.799 | 0.948 |
| LnPATENT | 3976 | 7.202 | 1.754 | 1.609 | 7.100 | 12.388 |
| FDI | 3976 | 0.018 | 0.028 | 0.000 | 0.011 | 0.697 |
| URBANIZATION | 3976 | 52.788 | 15.862 | 16.413 | 50.710 | 100.000 |
LM, LR and Hausman tests of the spatial econometric model.
| Test | Statistics | |
|---|---|---|
| LM Spatial error | 18.389 *** | <0.010 |
| LM Spatial autocorrelation | 207.128 *** | <0.010 |
| LR Spatial error | 26.67 *** | <0.010 |
| LR Spatial autocorrelation | 22.82 *** | <0.010 |
| Hausman | 83.61 *** | <0.001 |
Notes: T-statistics in parentheses, *** denote statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% level, respectively.
Spatial regression results.
| Variable | Inverse Distance Matrix | Adjacency Matrix | Economic Distance Matrix | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | t-Value | Coefficient | t-Value | Coefficient | t-Value | |
| FINANCE | 0.026 *** | 3.469 | 0.013 * | 1.657 | 0.039 *** | 6.279 |
| STRU | 0.001 * | 1.646 | 0.001 | 1.273 | 0.001 | 1.348 |
| FISCAL REVENUE DEC | −0.211 *** | −3.029 | −0.172 ** | −2.423 | −0.159 *** | −2.598 |
| FISCAL EXPEN DEC | −0.161 | −1.444 | −0.114 | −0.994 | −0.312 *** | −3.175 |
| LnPATENT | 0.002 | 0.271 | 0.004 | 0.593 | −0.010 * | −1.789 |
| FDI | 0.292 * | 1.875 | 0.436 *** | 2.640 | 0.448 *** | 3.058 |
| URBANIZATION | 0.002 *** | 2.812 | 0.001 | 1.312 | 0.002 *** | 2.984 |
| FINANCE·W | 0.186 *** | 2.998 | 0.055 *** | 4.775 | −0.001 | −0.043 |
| STRU·W | −0.008 | −1.374 | −0.001 | −0.525 | −0.002 | −1.083 |
| FISCAL REVENUE DEC·W | 1.363 ** | 2.353 | 0.102 | 0.979 | −0.256 | −1.531 |
| FISCAL EXPEN DEC·W | −0.446 | −0.511 | −0.249 | −1.445 | 0.517 ** | 2.101 |
| LnPATENT·W | −0.067 | −1.346 | −0.030 *** | −3.151 | 0.004 | 0.257 |
| FDI·W | 2.150 | 1.418 | 0.181 | 0.648 | 2.401 *** | 3.930 |
| URBANIZATION·W | −0.006 | −1.420 | 0.003 *** | 3.041 | −0.001 | −0.329 |
| Time fixed | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| Individual fixed | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
|
| 0.343 *** | 2.862 | 0.093 *** | 4.212 | −0.058 * | 1.793 |
| sigma2_e | 0.014 *** | 44.560 | 0.014 *** | 44.546 | 0.014 *** | 44.575 |
| Observations | 3976 | 3976 | 3976 | |||
Note: *, **, and *** are significant at 10%, 5% and 1% respectively.