4.5 Article

Do Carbon Emissions and Economic Growth Decouple in China? An Empirical Analysis Based on Provincial Panel Data

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en12122411

关键词

environmental Kuznets curve (EKC); decoupling theory; panel data; differential GMM estimation; Tapio decoupling model

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71761137001, 71403015, 71521002]
  2. Key Research Program of the Beijing Social Science Foundation [17JDYJA009]
  3. Beijing Natural Science Foundation [9162013]
  4. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFA0602801, 2016YFA0602603]
  5. Special Fund for the Joint Development Program of Beijing Municipal Commission of Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Global warming has emerged as a serious threat to humans and sustainable development. China is under increasing pressure to curb its carbon emissions as the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide. By combining the Tapio decoupling model and the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) framework, this paper explores the relationship between China's carbon emissions and economic growth. Based on panel data of 29 provinces from 2007 to 2016, this paper quantitatively estimates the nexus of carbon emissions and economic development for the whole nation and the decoupling status of individual provinces. There is empirical evidence for the conventional EKC hypothesis, showing that the relationship between carbon emissions and per capita gross domestic product (GDP) is an inverted U shape and that the inflection point will not be attained soon. Moreover, following the estimation results of the Tapio decoupling model, there were significant differences between individual provinces in decoupling status. As a result, differentiated and targeted environmental regulations and policies regarding energy consumption and carbon emissions should be reasonably formulated for different provinces and regions based on the corresponding level of economic development and decoupling status.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据