4.7 Article

How coal de-capacity policy affects renewable energy development efficiency? Evidence from China

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 286, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.129515

Keywords

Coal de-capacity policy; Renewable energy development efficiency; Environmental regulation; Difference-in-differences method

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study assesses the impact of China's de-capacity policy on renewable energy development efficiency (REDE) using the Global-MSBM model and the difference-in-differences method. The findings indicate that the policy significantly enhances REDE, promoting technological advancements and marketization. Moreover, regions with stricter environmental regulations experience a higher impact.
Developing renewable energy (RE) is crucial for achieving the goals of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality. However, the effectiveness of China's 2016 coal production reduction policy in encouraging RE development remains uncertain. To address this question, this study applies a novel approach, called the global reference modified slacks-based measure (Global-MSBM) model, to assess the renewable energy development efficiency (REDE), and applies the difference-in-differences (DID) method to examine the impact of the de-capacity policy on REDE. This study also investigates the mechanisms driving the policy's impact and the associated heterogeneity. The findings indicate the following. (1) Implementing the de-capacity policy significantly enhances REDE, and its impact becomes greater over time. (2) The policy encourages REDE by advancing renewable energy technology and enhancing marketization. (3) The heterogeneity analysis indicates that the de-capacity policy has a higher effect on REDE regions with stricter environmental regulations. This study reliably assesses the effectiveness of the de-capacity policy and provides valuable insights to enhance China's energy policy system.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available