4 research outputs found

    Spatial Spillover Effects of Directed Technical Change on Urban Carbon Intensity, Based on 283 Cities in China from 2008 to 2019

    No full text
    Technical change essentially drives regional social and economic development, and how technical change influences the regional sustainable development of the ecological environment is also of concern. However, technical change is not always neutral, so how does directed technical change affect urban carbon intensity? Is there a spatial spillover effect between these two? In order to answer these above questions, this article first explores the relationship between directed technical change and carbon intensity through the spatial Durbin model; then, it separately analyses whether the relationship between the two in low-carbon and non-low-carbon cities will differ; finally, we performed a robustness test by replacing weights, replacing the explained variable with a lag of one period, and replacing the explained variable. The conclusions are as follows: (1) There is a positive spatial correlation between the carbon intensity of Chinese cities—that is, there is a positive interaction between the carbon intensity of local cities and of neighboring cities. For every 1% change in the carbon intensity of neighboring cities, the carbon intensity of local cities changes by 0.1027% in the same direction. (2) The directed technical change has a significant inhibitory effect on urban carbon intensity, whether in local cities or neighboring cities. However, it is worth mentioning that the direct negative effect is greater in local cities than in neighboring cities. (3) The directed technical change in low-carbon cities has a stronger inhibitory effect on carbon intensity, with a direct effect coefficient of −0.5346 and an indirect effect coefficient of −0.2616. Due to less green policy support in non-low-carbon cities, the inhibitory effect of directed technical change on carbon intensity is weakened; even if the direct effects and indirect effects are superimposed, it is only −0.0510 rather than −0.7962 for low-carbon cities

    Understanding the Heterogeneous Impact of Innovation Efficiency on Urban Ecological Footprint in China

    No full text
    Under the background of tightening resource constraints and a deteriorating ecological environment, innovation is aimed at saving energy, reducing consumption, abating pollution and achieving sustainable economic growth. This has gradually become an important way to improve industrial structure, competitiveness and environmental performance worldwide. In this study, we use the super-efficiency SBM model to calculate the innovation efficiency of 283 cities in China from 2009 to 2019. Then, based on the dynamic threshold regression model, we explore the impact of innovation efficiency on ecological footprint in innovative cities or non-innovative cities under different economic development levels. The main conclusions that can be drawn are as follows. (1) Within the research period, the influence of innovation efficiency on ecological footprint in China shows a negative double threshold feature, that is, increasing regional innovation efficiency has an inhibitory effect on ecological footprint. (2) For innovative cities, innovation efficiency has a strong inhibitory effect on ecological footprint, and it becomes stronger and stronger with the growth of night light data; but this inhibitory effect is gradually decreasing with improvement of economic development level in non-innovative cities. (3) Under the threshold of different levels of economic development, the number of scientific human resources, scientific financial resources, scientific information resources and scientific papers has a positive effect on ecological footprint, while the number of patent applications has a negative effect on ecological footprint

    Does Intensive Land Use Contribute to Energy Efficiency?—Evidence Based on a Spatial Durbin Model

    No full text
    In order to ensure the safety of cultivated land and promote urban productivity, the Chinese government began to promote intensive land use at the legislative level from 2014. At the same time, China faces problems of carbon emissions and energy, so we need to improve energy efficiency. Therefore, this paper aims to verify the spatial effects of intensive land use on energy efficiency of China from 2009 to 2018. We further use an index system to quantify intensive land use and use chain DEA (data envelope analysis) to quantify energy efficiency. This paper finds that: (1) intensive land use can significantly improve energy efficiency. A 1% increase in the level of intensive land use will increase energy efficiency by 1.3%. (2) The intensive use of land in one city will have a negative impact on the energy efficiency of surrounding cities. The reason is that the intensive use of land in a single city may lead to the transfer of energy-consuming industries to surrounding cities. (3) The impact of intensive land use on the energy efficiency of surrounding cities has negative threshold characteristics, and the negative impact will be weakened as the level of integration of the city increases

    Does Innovation Efficiency Suppress the Ecological Footprint? Empirical Evidence from 280 Chinese Cities

    No full text
    Innovation is an important motivating force for regional sustainable development. This study measures the innovation efficiency of 280 cities in China from 2014–2018 using the super-efficiency slack-based measure and it also analyzes its impact on the ecological footprint using the generalized spatial two-stage least squares (GS2SLS) method and uses the threshold regression model to explore the threshold effect of innovation efficiency on the ecological footprint at different economic development levels. We find the corresponding transmission mechanism by using a mediating effect model. The major findings are as follows. First, we find an inverse U-shaped relationship between innovation efficiency and the ecological footprint for cities across China as well as in the eastern and central regions. That is, innovation efficiency promotes then suppresses the ecological footprint. Conversely, in western and northeastern China, improvements in innovation efficiency still raise the ecological footprint. Second, for the entire country, as economic development increases from below one threshold value (4.4928) to above another (4.8245), the elasticity coefficient of innovation efficiency to the ecological footprint changes from −0.0067 to −0.0313. This indicates that the ability of innovation efficiency improvements to reduce the ecological footprint is gradually enhanced with increased economic development. Finally, the industrial structure, the energy structure, and energy efficiency mediate the impacts of innovation efficiency on the ecological footprint
    corecore