IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i5p2033-d1349032.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inequality Evolution of Economic Gains and Environmental Losses in Chinese Interprovincial Trade during 2007–2017

Author

Listed:
  • Yuan Qian

    (Petroleum Exploration and Production Research Institute, Sinopec, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Huan Zheng

    (Petroleum Exploration and Production Research Institute, Sinopec, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Xin Cao

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China)

  • Ting Li

    (Petroleum Exploration and Production Research Institute, Sinopec, Beijing 102206, China)

  • Lin Zhao

    (School of Economics, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Sulian Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin 300401, China)

Abstract

A reduction in SO 2 emissions is important for sustainable development. However, China uses territorial emissions to determine its SO 2 emission mitigation targets, ignoring the emissions that are incorporated into interregional trade. In addition to the transfer of pollution, value added can also be exchanged with trade, resulting in environmental inequality among regions. In this study, we estimate the embodied SO 2 emissions (ESE) under production-, consumption-, and income-based accounting principles and quantify the embodied value added (EVA) within the interprovincial trade during 2007–2017 using the multi-regional input–output (MRIO) model. The inequalities between the ESE and EVA are further investigated using the Gini coefficients method and the regional environmental index method. The results indicate that ~34.7–43.4% of SO 2 emissions and ~24.6–30.8% of value added were triggered by interprovincial trade. Furthermore, developed provinces mainly outsourced their emissions to less developed provinces, particularly to those nearby. Concerning the value added, it was mainly outsourced from less developed provinces to developed provinces during 2007–2010, with no clear patterns observed during 2012–2017. The study’s findings indicate that the high inequality of SO 2 emissions and value added also occurred between developed and less developed provinces. Particularly, the Gini coefficients of value inflow–SO 2 outflow (VISO) were larger than those of value outflow–SO 2 inflow (VOSI), which indicated that, besides the direct emissions, consumption-based emissions should be considered when allocating the environmental responsibility among provinces. These findings are valuable for shaping pathways towards achieving regional economic coordination and sustainable development.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuan Qian & Huan Zheng & Xin Cao & Ting Li & Lin Zhao & Sulian Wang, 2024. "Inequality Evolution of Economic Gains and Environmental Losses in Chinese Interprovincial Trade during 2007–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-25, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2033-:d:1349032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2033/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/2033/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duan, Yuwan & Yan, Bingqian, 2019. "Economic gains and environmental losses from international trade: A decomposition of pollution intensity in China's value-added trade," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 540-554.
    2. Yu, Yang & Hubacek, Klaus & Feng, Kuishuang & Guan, Dabo, 2010. "Assessing regional and global water footprints for the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1140-1147, March.
    3. Wiedmann, Thomas, 2009. "A first empirical comparison of energy Footprints embodied in trade -- MRIO versus PLUM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1975-1990, May.
    4. Boyce, James K. & Zwickl, Klara & Ash, Michael, 2016. "Measuring environmental inequality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 114-123.
    5. 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.
    6. Kjartan Steen-Olsen & Anne Owen & John Barrett & Dabo Guan & Edgar G. Hertwich & Manfred Lenzen & Thomas Wiedmann, 2016. "Accounting for value added embodied in trade and consumption: an intercomparison of global multiregional input--output databases," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 78-94, March.
    7. Marques, Alexandra & Rodrigues, João & Lenzen, Manfred & Domingos, Tiago, 2012. "Income-based environmental responsibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 57-65.
    8. Hongguang Liu & Klaus Lackner & Xiaomei Fan, 2021. "Value-added involved in CO2 emissions embodied in global demand-supply chains," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(1), pages 76-100, January.
    9. Kearsley, Aaron & Riddel, Mary, 2010. "A further inquiry into the Pollution Haven Hypothesis and the Environmental Kuznets Curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 905-919, February.
    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. Shimei Wu & Haotian Zhang, 2022. "The existence and mechanism of the domestic pollution haven hypothesis: evidence from 265 cities in China," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 287-310, December.
    2. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Nasreen, Samia & Ahmed, Khalid & Hammoudeh, Shawkat, 2017. "Trade openness–carbon emissions nexus: The importance of turning points of trade openness for country panels," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 221-232.
    3. Halicioglu, Ferda & Ketenci, Natalya, 2015. "The impact of international trade on environmental quality in transition countries: evidence from time series data during 1991-2013," MPRA Paper 71097, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2015.
    4. Mi, Zhifu & Zhang, Yunkun & Guan, Dabo & Shan, Yuli & Liu, Zhu & Cong, Ronggang & Yuan, Xiao-Chen & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2016. "Consumption-based emission accounting for Chinese cities," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1073-1081.
    5. Llorca, Manuel & Rodriguez-Alvarez, Ana, 2024. "Economic, environmental, and energy equity convergence: Evidence of a multi-speed Europe?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    6. Octavio Fernández-Amador & Joseph F. Francois & Doris A. Oberdabernig & Patrick Tomberger, 2020. "Economic growth, sectoral structures, and environmental methane footprints," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(13), pages 1460-1475, March.
    7. Azad Haider & Muhammad Iftikhar ul Husnain & Wimal Rankaduwa & Farzana Shaheen, 2021. "Nexus between Nitrous Oxide Emissions and Agricultural Land Use in Agrarian Economy: An ARDL Bounds Testing Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    8. Nicolli, Francesco & Gilli, Marianna & Vona, Francesco, 2022. "Inequality and Climate Change: Two Problems, One Solution?," FEEM Working Papers 329340, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. Fahimnia, Behnam & Sarkis, Joseph & Davarzani, Hoda, 2015. "Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 101-114.
    10. Carolina Jimenez & Luis Moncada & Diego Ochoa-Jimenez & Wilman-Santiago Ochoa-Moreno, 2019. "Kuznets Environmental Curve for Ecuador: An Analysis of the Impact of Economic Growth on the Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-11, October.
    11. Bennedsen, Mikkel & Hillebrand, Eric & Jensen, Sebastian, 2023. "A neural network approach to the environmental Kuznets curve," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    12. Barra, Cristian & Zotti, Roberto, 2016. "Investigating the impact of national income on environmental pollution. International evidence," MPRA Paper 74149, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Fozia Latif Gill & K Kuperan Viswanathan & Mohd Zaini Abdul Karim, 2018. "The Critical Review of the Pollution Haven Hypothesis (PHH)," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(1), pages 167-174.
    14. Xiaoping He & Xin Yao, 2017. "Foreign Direct Investments and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: New Evidence from Chinese Provinces," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(1), pages 12-25, January.
    15. Fernández-Amador, Octavio & Francois, Joseph F. & Oberdabernig, Doris A. & Tomberger, Patrick, 2017. "Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Economic Growth: An Assessment Based on Production and Consumption Emission Inventories," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 269-279.
    16. Priscilla Massa-Sánchez & Luis Quintana-Romero & Ronny Correa-Quezada & María de la Cruz del Río-Rama, 2020. "Empirical Evidence in Ecuador between Economic Growth and Environmental Deterioration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, January.
    17. Cristian Barra & Roberto Zotti, 2018. "Investigating the non-linearity between national income and environmental pollution: international evidence of Kuznets curve," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(1), pages 179-210, January.
    18. Karakaya, Etem & Yılmaz, Burcu & Alataş, Sedat, 2018. "How Production Based and Consumption Based Emissions Accounting Systems Change Climate Policy Analysis: The Case of CO2 Convergence," MPRA Paper 88781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Liu, Yiming & Hao, Yu & Gao, Yixuan, 2017. "The environmental consequences of domestic and foreign investment: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 271-280.
    20. Ren, Shenggang & Yuan, Baolong & Ma, Xie & Chen, Xiaohong, 2014. "International trade, FDI (foreign direct investment) and embodied CO2 emissions: A case study of Chinas industrial sectors," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 123-134.

    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:16:y:2024:i:5:p:2033-:d:1349032. 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.