IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i15p11482-d1201625.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can Environmental Centralization Enhance Emission Reductions?—Evidence from China’s Vertical Management Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Linlin Cheng

    (School of Economics and Management, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China
    Hubei Circular Economy Development Research Center, Wuhan 430068, China)

  • Qiangxi Song

    (School of Economics and Management, Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan 430068, China
    Hubei Circular Economy Development Research Center, Wuhan 430068, China)

  • Ke He

    (College of Economics & Management, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    Laboratory of Green and Low-Carbon Development in Agriculture, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

Abstract

In the industrialization process, the difficulty in implementing environmental protection and enhancing the effect of environmental emission reduction are common problems to the developing countries, which are directly related to the quality of social development. This paper takes environmental centralization as the solution idea, takes the vertical management reform of environmental protection agencies implemented in China as the research object, and evaluates the environmental emission reduction effect and mechanism of action of centralized reform based on provincial environmental economic panel data using difference-in-differences model and intermediary model. The following conclusions are drawn: (1) The environmental centralization has significantly improved the provincial environmental emission reduction effect. After China’s vertical management reforms were implemented, per capita CO 2 emissions decreased by 11.1%, and industrial source SO 2 emissions fell by 35.7%. (2) By increasing investment in urban environmental infrastructure construction, the reform has raised the level of investment and regulation in environmental protection construction, which in turn has effectively improved the ability to reduce environmental emissions. (3) After the implementation of the reform, the emission reduction effects of the reform on per capita CO 2 and industrial source SO 2 are 10.1% and 14.2% higher in provinces with lower industrial output value compared to those with higher industrial output value. At the same time, the effect of reform in provinces with a strong degree of local government intervention was significantly lower than that in provinces with a weak degree of local government intervention. The emission reduction effects of the reform implementation are 10.2% (per capita CO 2 ) and 30.5% (industrial source SO 2 ) lower, respectively. Based on the above findings, this paper argues that environmental centralization is an effective measure to advance the improvement of environmental quality and efficiency. In addition, China’s reform experience has implications for other developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Linlin Cheng & Qiangxi Song & Ke He, 2023. "Can Environmental Centralization Enhance Emission Reductions?—Evidence from China’s Vertical Management Reform," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-17, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11482-:d:1201625
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11482/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/15/11482/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C de Chaisemartin & X D’HaultfŒuille, 2018. "Fuzzy Differences-in-Differences," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(2), pages 999-1028.
    2. Han, Chao & Tian, Xian-Liang, 2022. "Less pollution under a more centralized environmental system: Evidence from vertical environmental reforms in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Schmidheiny, Kurt & Siegloch, Sebastian, 2019. "On Event Study Designs and Distributed-Lag Models: Equivalence, Generalization and Practical Implications," IZA Discussion Papers 12079, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. He, Qichun, 2015. "Fiscal decentralization and environmental pollution: Evidence from Chinese panel data," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 86-100.
    5. Xiaohua Hou & Bo Cheng & Zhiliang Xia & Haijun Zhou & Qi Shen & Yanjie Lu & Ehsan Nazemi & Guodao Zhang, 2023. "Investigating the Relationship between Economic Growth, Institutional Environment and Sulphur Dioxide Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Kurt Schmidheiny & Sebastian Siegloch, 2023. "On event studies and distributed‐lags in two‐way fixed effects models: Identification, equivalence, and generalization," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(5), pages 695-713, August.
    7. Allen Blackman & Zhengyan Li & Antung A. Liu, 2018. "Efficacy of Command-and-Control and Market-Based Environmental Regulation in Developing Countries," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 381-404, October.
    8. Rubashkina, Yana & Galeotti, Marzio & Verdolini, Elena, 2015. "Environmental regulation and competitiveness: Empirical evidence on the Porter Hypothesis from European manufacturing sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 288-300.
    9. Molly Lipscomb & Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak, 2017. "Decentralization and Pollution Spillovers: Evidence from the Re-drawing of County Borders in Brazil," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(1), pages 464-502.
    10. William Nordhaus, 2019. "Climate Change: The Ultimate Challenge for Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(6), pages 1991-2014, June.
    11. Ming Yi & Xiaomeng Fang & Le Wen & Fengtao Guang & Yao Zhang, 2019. "The Heterogeneous Effects of Different Environmental Policy Instruments on Green Technology Innovation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, November.
    12. de Chaisemartin, Clement & D'Haultfoeuille, Xavier, 2014. "Fuzzy Changes-in Changes," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 184, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    13. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Identification and Inference in Nonlinear Difference-in-Differences Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 431-497, March.
    14. Song, Yi & Zhang, Yangxueying & Zhang, Yijun, 2022. "Economic and environmental influences of resource tax: Firm-level evidence from China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Zhang, Yijun & Song, Yi, 2022. "Tax rebates, technological innovation and sustainable development: Evidence from Chinese micro-level data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    16. Cole, Matthew A., 2004. "Trade, the pollution haven hypothesis and the environmental Kuznets curve: examining the linkages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 71-81, January.
    17. Rashid Gill, Abid & Viswanathan, Kuperan K. & Hassan, Sallahuddin, 2018. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) and the environmental problem of the day," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1636-1642.
    18. Tu, Meng & Zhang, Bing & Xu, Jianhua & Lu, Fangwen, 2020. "Mass media, information and demand for environmental quality: Evidence from the “Under the Dome”," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    19. Chen, Gao & Xu, Jian & Qi, Yu, 2022. "Environmental (de)centralization and local environmental governance: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    20. Anthony D. Owen, 2004. "Environmental Externalities, Market Distortions and the Economics of Renewable Energy Technologies," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 127-158.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roth, Jonathan & Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Bilinski, Alyssa & Poe, John, 2023. "What’s trending in difference-in-differences? A synthesis of the recent econometrics literature," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 2218-2244.
    2. Tan, Jing & Liu, Tianyi & Xu, Hao, 2024. "The environmental and economic consequences of environmental centralization: Evidence from China's environmental vertical management reform," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    3. Cl'ement de Chaisemartin & Xavier D'Haultf{oe}uille, 2021. "Two-Way Fixed Effects and Differences-in-Differences with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects: A Survey," Papers 2112.04565, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    4. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cagé & Michael Sinkinson, 2024. "Media Competition and News Diets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 62-102, May.
    5. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4ec86lkes59hv9tfv77ld1p5fr is not listed on IDEAS
    6. D’Haultfœuille, Xavier & Hoderlein, Stefan & Sasaki, Yuya, 2023. "Nonparametric difference-in-differences in repeated cross-sections with continuous treatments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 664-690.
    7. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03393063, HAL.
    8. Clément de Chaisemartin & Xavier D’Haultfœuille, 2023. "Two-way fixed effects and differences-in-differences with heterogeneous treatment effects: a survey," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 26(3), pages 1-30.
    9. Brantly Callaway & Weige Huang, 2020. "Distributional Effects of a Continuous Treatment with an Application on Intergenerational Mobility," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(4), pages 808-842, August.
    10. Kotyrlo, Elena, 2024. "Simple and complex difference-in-differences approach," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 73, pages 119-142.
    11. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," SciencePo Working papers hal-03393063, HAL.
    12. Burgherr, David, 2022. "Behavioral Responses to a Pension Savings Mandate : Quasi-experimental Evidence from Swiss Tax Data," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 645, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    13. Werner L. Hernani-Limarino & Gary Mena, 2015. "Efectos intencionados y no intencionados de transferencias monetarias no condicionadas a los adultos mayores: El caso de la Renta Dignidad," Working Papers 03/2015, Fundación Aru.
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ec86lkes59hv9tfv77ld1p5fr is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Chi, Guodong & Liu, Yuanyuan & Fang, Hong, 2024. "Does environmental management system reform improve air quality? Quasi-experimental evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 45-62.
    16. Ines Helm & Jan Stuhler, 2024. "The Dynamic Response of Municipal Budgets to Revenue Shocks," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 484-527, October.
    17. Cl'ement de Chaisemartin & Diego Ciccia Xavier D'Haultf{oe}uille & Felix Knau, 2024. "Two-way Fixed Effects and Differences-in-Differences Estimators in Heterogeneous Adoption Designs," Papers 2405.04465, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.
    18. de Chaisemartin, Clement & D'Haultfoeuille, Xavier, "undated". "Supplement to Fuzzy Differences-in-Differences," Economic Research Papers 270217, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    19. Blesse, Sebastian & Diegmann, André, 2022. "The place-based effects of police stations on crime: Evidence from station closures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    20. Maclean, J. Catherine & Pichler, Stefan & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2020. "Mandated Sick Pay: Coverage, Utilization, and Welfare Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 13132, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes & Neeraj Kaushal & Ashley N. Muchow, 2021. "Timing of social distancing policies and COVID-19 mortality: county-level evidence from the U.S," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(4), pages 1445-1472, October.
    22. Isabella Giorgetti & Matteo Picchio, 2021. "One billion euro programme for early childcare services in Italy," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 460-492, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:15:p:11482-:d:1201625. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.