4.8 Review

The approach to realizing the potential of emissions reduction in China: An implication from data envelopment analysis

Journal

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
Volume 71, Issue -, Pages 859-872

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.114

Keywords

Meta-frontier DEA; Structure adjustment; Regional balance; Market-oriented reform

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71373283, 71373287, 71403298, 71573282, 71633006]
  2. National Social Science Foundation of China [13ZD024, 13ZD169, 14ZDB136]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By proposing a three-hierarchy meta-frontier data envelopment analysis (DEA), this paper first decomposes CO2-emissions efficiency and the potential for emissions reduction into the following three components: structural, technical, and management. Based on these components, we then conduct an empirical analysis of China's total-factor CO2-emissions efficiency, its potential for CO2-emissions reduction, and its corresponding implementation path. The results show that CO2-emissions efficiency in Mainland China is relatively low because of structural inefficiency, technical inefficiency, and management inefficiency. The Chinese government is expected to realize a large quantity of CO2-emissions reduction potential (nearly 40% of the current total CO2-emissions) through adjusting the industrial structure, narrowing the technology gap among regions, promoting the reform of marketization, and strengthening environmental regulation. The causes of CO2-emissions inefficiency and the distribution of potential reductions in emissions show a distinct spatial difference characteristic. Therefore, this paper also formulates emissions-reduction strategies for China's 30 provinces according to their specific situations, noting the direction of the industrial structure adjustment and the path to improving CO2-emissions efficiency.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available