4.7 Article

Factors that Influence the Tourism Industry's Carbon Emissions: a Tourism Area Life Cycle Model Perspective

期刊

ENERGY POLICY
卷 109, 期 -, 页码 704-718

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.07.050

关键词

carbon emission; tourism destination; tourism area life cycle model; green and low-carbon development; the Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41301161, 41671527]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2013M530711]
  3. Beijing Social Science Fund [13JDZHC007]
  4. Project of Top-notch Young Higher Level Teaching Team Building Support Plan in Beijing Municipal Universities [CIT TCD201704067]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposed a factor decomposition model for analyzing carbon emissions in energy consumption of the tourism industry from the perspective of tourism area life cycle. The Wulingyuan Scenic and Historic Interest Area (WSHIA) was chosen as the study area for the analysis of the influencing, factors on carbon emissions for the tourism industry over the different stages of its life cycle. The research results showed that growth in the scale of tourists and the scale of tourism output both result in the rapid growth of carbon emissions; the constant decrease in energy intensity helped inhibit carbon emissions from the stage of exploration to the stage of consolidation. However, the scale effects of tourists and the energy intensity had become the important positive factors to the growth of carbon emission, while the effects of energy structure and output scale on the growth of carbon emission had become negative factors. The inhibition of the growth of carbon emissions from optimizing the industrial structure was rapidly weakening at the stage of transformation and upgrading. Designers of policy on energy-saving and emission-reduction should focus on the differential measures, according to different influencing factors that affect carbon emissions at different life cycle stages.

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

4.7
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