4.6 Article

Econometric analysis of the impact of innovative city pilots on CO2 emissions in China

Journal

ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
Volume 25, Issue 9, Pages 9359-9386

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02439-8

Keywords

Innovative city; CO2 emissions; Policy effect; Difference-in-differences model; China

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzes panel data of 285 cities in China and finds that the innovative city pilot scheme significantly reduces CO2 emissions, with a 17.1% decrease in pilot cities compared to non-pilot cities. The impact of the pilot scheme is mainly seen in the central region and prefecture-level cities, and is mediated by technological innovation, industrial upgrading, and environmental governance.
Technological progress is considered an effective means to reduce carbon emissions, and an innovative city pilot scheme may contribute to this target. However, the impact of innovation city construction on carbon emissions has not been systematically studied. Based on panel data of 285 cities at prefecture level and above in China from 2003 to 2017, this study employs the difference-in-differences approach to evaluate the impact of innovative city pilots on CO2 emissions. The results show that CO2 emissions in pilot cities are 17.1% lower than that in non-pilot cities, indicating that the scheme contributes significantly to carbon emission reduction. Meanwhile, the spatiotemporal characteristics suggest that the local effect increases over time and the spillover effect is significant within 150-250 km. Additionally, a heterogeneity analysis shows that the impact of the pilot scheme on CO2 emissions is mainly reflected in the central region and prefecture-level cities. Lastly, mechanism analysis indicates that the pilot policy reduces CO2 emissions by promoting technological innovation, industrial upgrading, and environmental governance, of which technological innovation plays the most important mediating role.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available