How Does Manufacturing Agglomeration Affect Green Development? A Spatial and Nonlinear Perspective
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Conceptual Framework
3.1. Direct Path of MA Affecting GD
3.2. Indirect Path of MA Affecting GD
4. Research Design
4.1. Methodology
4.1.1. Spatial Panel Durbin Model
4.1.2. Mediating Effect Model
4.2. Variables
4.2.1. Explained Variable
4.2.2. Core Explanatory Variable
4.2.3. Control Variables
4.2.4. Mediating Variables
4.3. Endogeneity and Instrumental Variables
4.4. Study Area
4.5. Data Source
5. Empirical Analysis
5.1. Spatio-Temporal Analysis of GD
5.1.1. Temporal Evolution Analysis
5.1.2. Spatial Evolution Analysis
5.2. Baseline Regression Result
5.3. Robust Test
5.3.1. Changing the Spatial Weight Matrix
5.3.2. Replacing Core Explanatory Variable
5.3.3. Add Control Variables
5.4. Heterogeneity Analysis
5.4.1. Temporal Heterogeneity
5.4.2. Spatial Heterogeneity
5.4.3. Heterogeneity of Urban Characteristics
6. Mediating Effect Test
7. Conclusions and Discussion
7.1. Conclusions
7.2. Policy Implications
7.3. Critical Analysis and Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
MA | Manufacturing agglomeration |
GD | Green development |
YREB | Yangtze River Economic Belt |
GS2SLS | Generalized spatial two-stage least squares |
GDP | Gross domestic product |
HHI | Herfindahl–Hirschman index |
IV | Instrumental variable |
DEM | Digital elevation model |
GIS | Geoinformation system |
VIF | Variance inflation factor |
OLS | Ordinary least squares |
FGLS | Feasible generalized least squares |
Appendix A
Criterion | Basic Indicators | Units | Attributes |
---|---|---|---|
Driving force of green development (D) | Labor productivity in the primary sector | 104 yuan/person | Positive |
Labor productivity in the secondary sector | Ten thousand yuan/person | Positive | |
Labor productivity in the tertiary sector | 104 yuan/person | Positive | |
The percentage of science and technology expenditure in local public expenditure in the city | % | Positive | |
Pressure of green development (P) | The proportion of added value of the tertiary sector | % | Positive |
Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions per GDP | Ton/104 yuan | Negative | |
Industrial soot emissions per GDP | Ton/104 yuan | Negative | |
Industrial wastewater emissions per GDP | Ton/yuan | Negative | |
Energy consumption per unit of gross regional product | Kilowatt hour/yuan | Negative | |
Status of green development (S) | Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions per capita | Ton/person | Negative |
Industrial sulfur dioxide emissions per capita | Ton/person | Negative | |
Industrial wastewater emissions per capita | 104 tons/person | Negative | |
The proportion of the number of employees in manufacturing industry to the year-end number of employees per unit | % | Negative | |
Impact of green development (I) | The year-end balance of savings for urban and rural residents | 104 yuan | Positive |
Teacher–student ratio in general primary schools | People/104 people | Positive | |
Teacher–student ratio in general middle schools | People/104 people | Positive | |
Green coverage of the completed area | % | Positive | |
Green area in park per person | Square meters/person | Positive | |
Green area in city per person | Square meters/person | Positive | |
Response of green development (R) | Industrial sulfur dioxide removal ratio | % | Positive |
Industrial soot removal ratio | % | Positive | |
Industrial solid waste utilization ratio | % | Positive | |
Domestic sewage treatment ratio | % | Positive | |
Harmless treatment ratio of domestic garbage | % | Positive |
Appendix B
Variables | VIF | lnGD | lnMA | lnEL | lnIND | lnER | lnRD | lnLU | lnIS | lnTI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
lnGD | - | 1.000 | ||||||||
lnMA | 1.87 | 0.290 * | 1.000 | |||||||
lnEL | 3.89 | 0.836 * | 0.497 * | 1.000 | ||||||
lnIND | 2.92 | 0.115 * | 0.496 * | 0.263 * | 1.000 | |||||
lnER | 1.82 | 0.746 * | 0.315 * | 0.636 * | 0.237 * | 1.000 | ||||
lnRD | 4.05 | 0.681 * | 0.552 * | 0.776 * | 0.318 * | 0.503 * | 1.000 | |||
lnLU | 2.07 | 0.554 * | 0.332 * | 0.609 * | 0.130 * | 0.327 * | 0.686 * | 1.000 | ||
lnIU | 2.62 | 0.016 | −0.355 * | −0.099 * | −0.764 * | −0.177 * | −0.120 * | 0.069 * | 1.000 | |
lnTI | 4.01 | 0.732 * | 0.563 * | 0.808 * | 0.277 * | 0.602 * | 0.797 * | 0.567 * | −0.128 * | 1.0000 |
Appendix C
Year | lnGD | lnMA | lnEL | lnIL | lnER | lnRD |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2003 | 0.058 *** | 0.090 *** | 0.202 | 0.046 *** | 0.088 *** | 0.142 *** |
2004 | 0.084 *** | 0.115 *** | 0.203 | 0.043 *** | 0.074 *** | 0.150 *** |
2005 | 0.105 *** | 0.115 *** | 0.204 | 0.031 *** | 0.090 *** | 0.154 *** |
2006 | 0.117 *** | 0.115 *** | 0.205 | 0.018 ** | 0.085 *** | 0.150 *** |
2007 | 0.143 *** | 0.131 *** | 0.205 | 0.010 * | 0.087 *** | 0.147 *** |
2008 | 0.175 *** | 0.131 *** | 0.205 | 0.004 | 0.094 *** | 0.131 *** |
2009 | 0.187 *** | 0.136 *** | 0.207 | 0.006 | 0.072 *** | 0.177 *** |
2010 | 0.175 *** | 0.135 *** | 0.202 | 0.002 | 0.072 *** | 0.181 *** |
2011 | 0.112 *** | 0.122 *** | 0.089 | 0.003 | 0.049 *** | 0.111 *** |
2012 | 0.154 *** | 0.129 *** | 0.182 | 0.004 | 0.045 *** | 0.174 *** |
2013 | 0.133 *** | 0.113 *** | 0.162 | 0.006 | 0.049 *** | 0.170 *** |
2014 | 0.136 *** | 0.127 *** | 0.160 | 0.008 * | 0.086 *** | 0.158 *** |
2015 | 0.141 *** | 0.131 *** | 0.158 | 0.016 ** | 0.073 *** | 0.160 *** |
2016 | 0.139 *** | 0.141 *** | 0.155 | 0.011 ** | 0.093 *** | 0.150 *** |
References
- Han, F.; Xie, R.; Fang, J. Urban Agglomeration Economies and Industrial Energy Efficiency. Energy 2018, 162, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Patiño-Echeverri, D.; Zhang, J.J. Policies to Promote Energy Efficiency and Air Emissions Reductions in China’s Electric Power Generation Sector during the 11th and 12th Five-Year Plan Periods: Achievements, Remaining Challenges, and Opportunities. Energy Policy 2019, 125, 429–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BP. Statistical Review of World; BP: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Bu, M.; Li, S.; Jiang, L. Foreign Direct Investment and Energy Intensity in China: Firm-Level Evidence. Energy Econ. 2019, 80, 366–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, Y.; Dai, H.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, Y.; Hanaoka, T.; Masui, T. Comparison of Health and Economic Impacts of PM2.5 and Ozone Pollution in China. Environ. Int. 2019, 130, 104881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shi, B.; Yang, H.; Wang, J.; Zhao, J. City Green Economy Evaluation: Empirical Evidence from 15 Sub-Provincial Cities in China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiu, S.; Wang, Z.; Liu, S. The Policy Outcomes of Low-Carbon City Construction on Urban Green Development: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment Conducted in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 66, 102699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, H.; Feng, Y.; Lee, C.-C.; Cen, Y. How Does Manufacturing Agglomeration Affect Green Economic Efficiency? Energy Econ. 2020, 92, 104944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank. 2010. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Chen, S. Energy Consumption, CO2 Emission and Sustainable Development in Chinese Industry. Econ. Res. J. 2009, 4, 41–55. [Google Scholar]
- National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC). 2017. Available online: https://data.stats.gov.cn/easyquery.htm?cn=E0103 (accessed on 18 January 2022).
- Krugman, P. Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. J. Political Econ. 1991, 99, 483–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marshall, A. Principles of Economics; Maxmillan: New York, NY, USA, 1890. [Google Scholar]
- Weber, A. Ueber Den Standort Der Industrien; Рипoл Классик: Moscow, Russia, 1909. [Google Scholar]
- Acs, Z.J.; Audretsch, D.B.; Feldman, M.P. R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1994, 76, 336–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badr, K.; Rizk, R.; Zaki, C. Firm Productivity and Agglomeration Economies: Evidence from Egyptian Data. Appl. Econ. 2019, 51, 5528–5544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, D.; Jiang, K.; Xu, C.; Yang, X. Clustering, Growth and Inequality in China. J. Econ. Geogr. 2020, 20, 1207–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sim, M.K.; Deng, S.; Huo, X. What Can Cluster Analysis Offer in Investing?—Measuring Structural Changes in the Investment Universe. Int. Rev. Econ. Financ. 2021, 71, 299–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, W.; Li, L.; Huang, Y. Industrial Collaborative Agglomeration, Marketization, and Green Innovation: Evidence from China’s Provincial Panel Data. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 279, 123598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Xu, Y.; Yao, X. Effects of Industrial Agglomeration on Haze Pollution: A Chinese City-Level Study. Energy Policy 2021, 148, 111928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, M.; Khan, Z.; Anser, M.K.; Jabeen, G. Do Rural-Urban Migration and Industrial Agglomeration Mitigate the Environmental Degradation across China’s Regional Development Levels? Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 27, 679–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, W.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Du, L.; Chen, H. Impact of Industrial Agglomeration on Haze Pollution: New Evidence from Bohai Sea Economic Region in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, J.; Tang, X.; Xie, R.; Han, F. The Effect of Manufacturing Agglomerations on Smog Pollution. Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 2020, 54, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C.; Wang, J.-W.; Wang, C.-M.; Cheng, J.-H.; Dai, J. Does Tourism Industry Agglomeration Reduce Carbon Emissions? Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 30278–30293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Wang, J. Does Industrial Agglomeration Facilitate Environmental Performance: New Evidence from Urban China? J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 248, 109244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Xu, H.; Tang, K. Industrial Agglomeration, CO2 Emissions and Regional Development Programs: A Decomposition Analysis Based on 286 Chinese Cities. Energy 2021, 225, 120239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, D.; Chen, S.; Jin, H. Industrial Agglomeration and CO2 Emissions: Evidence from 187 Chinese Prefecture-Level Cities over 2005–2013. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 993–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Zhang, X. Industrial Agglomeration, Technological Innovation and Carbon Productivity: Evidence from China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 166, 105330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, N.; Peng, H. Can Industrial Agglomeration Achieve the Emission-Reduction Effect? Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2021, 75, 100867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellison, G.; Glaeser, E.L.; Kerr, W.R. What Causes Industry Agglomeration? Evidence from Coagglomeration Patterns. Am. Econ. Rev. 2010, 100, 1195–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Lu, W.; Li, M. A DEA-Based Improvement of China’s Green Development from the Perspective of Resource Reallocation. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 717, 137106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hong, Y.; Lyu, X.; Chen, Y.; Li, W. Industrial Agglomeration Externalities, Local Governments’ Competition and Environmental Pollution: Evidence from Chinese Prefecture-Level Cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 277, 123455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pei, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, S.; Xie, M. Industrial Agglomeration and Environmental Pollution: Based on the Specialized and Diversified Agglomeration in the Yangtze River Delta. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 4061–4085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciccone, A. Agglomeration Effects in Europe. Eur. Econ. Rev. 2002, 46, 213–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williamson, O.E. The Lens of Contract: Private Ordering. Am. Econ. Rev. 2002, 92, 438–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhong, Q.; Tang, T. Impact of Government Intervention on Industrial Cluster Innovation Network in Developing Countries. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2018, 54, 3351–3365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sellitto, M.A.; Camfield, C.G.; Buzuku, S. Green Innovation and Competitive Advantages in a Furniture Industrial Cluster: A Survey and Structural Model. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2020, 23, 94–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faggio, G.; Silva, O.; Strange, W.C. Tales of the City: What Do Agglomeration Cases Tell Us about Agglomeration in General? J. Econ. Geogr. 2020, 20, 1117–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, W.; Zhang, W.-L.; Wen, J.; Wang, J.-S. TFP Growth in Chinese Cities: The Role of Factor-Intensity and Industrial Agglomeration. Econ. Model. 2020, 91, 534–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feldman, M.P.; Audretsch, D.B. Innovation in Cities: Science-Based Diversity, Specialization and Localized Competition. Eur. Econ. Rev. 1999, 43, 409–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanlon, W.W.; Miscio, A. Agglomeration: A Long-Run Panel Data Approach. J. Urban Econ. 2017, 99, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aghion, P.; Festré, A. Schumpeterian Growth Theory, Schumpeter, and Growth Policy Design. J. Evol. Econ. 2017, 27, 25–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, S.M.; Upadhyay, M.P. The Effects of Openness, Trade Orientation, and Human Capital on Total Factor Productivity. J. Dev. Econ. 2000, 63, 399–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Hulten, M.; Pelser, M.; van Loon, L.C.; Pieterse, C.M.J.; Ton, J. Costs and Benefits of Priming for Defense in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 5602–5607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yuan, H. The Spatial Threshold Effect and Its Regional Boundary of New-Type Urbanization on Energy Efficiency. Energy Policy 2022, 164, 112866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.; Zou, L.; Yuan, H.; Dai, L. The Spatial Spillover Effects and Impact Paths of Financial Agglomeration on Green Development: Evidence from 285 Prefecture-Level Cities in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 340, 130816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, H.; Zhang, T.; Feng, Y.; Liu, Y.; Ye, X. Does Financial Agglomeration Promote the Green Development in China? A Spatial Spillover Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 237, 117808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, C.; Shao, J.; Shi, Z. Does Financial Agglomeration Promote the Increase of Energy Efficiency in China? Energy Policy 2020, 146, 111810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, S. London Calling? Agglomeration Economies in Literature since 1700. J. Urban Econ. 2019, 112, 16–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lv, Y.; Chen, W.; Cheng, J. Effects of Urbanization on Energy Efficiency in China: New Evidence from Short Run and Long Run Efficiency Models. Energy Policy 2020, 147, 111858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, C.; Wang, S. Examining the Determinants and the Spatial Nexus of City-Level CO2 Emissions in China: A Dynamic Spatial Panel Analysis of China’s Cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 171, 917–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, K.; Wu, M.; Sun, Y.; Shi, X.; Sun, A.; Zhang, P. Resource Abundance, Industrial Structure, and Regional Carbon Emissions Efficiency in China. Resour. Policy 2019, 60, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shapiro, J.S.; Walker, R. Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade. Am. Econ. Rev. 2018, 108, 3814–3854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miao, Z.; Baležentis, T.; Tian, Z.; Shao, S.; Geng, Y.; Wu, R. Environmental Performance and Regulation Effect of China’s Atmospheric Pollutant Emissions: Evidence from “Three Regions and Ten Urban Agglomerations”. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2019, 74, 211–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Zhang, D.; Huang, L.; Wen, H.; Zhao, G.; Zhan, D. Spatial Distribution and Influential Factors of Industrial Land Productivity in China’s Rapid Urbanization. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 234, 1287–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Völlmecke, D.; Jindra, B.; Marek, P. FDI, Human Capital and Income Convergence—Evidence for European Regions. Econ. Syst. 2016, 40, 288–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, Z.; Li, L.; Liu, J. Industrial Structure, Technical Progress and Carbon Intensity in China’s Provinces. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 2935–2946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, H.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, T.; Wang, L. Revisiting China’s Provincial Energy Efficiency and Its Influencing Factors. Energy 2020, 208, 118361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martin, P.; Ottaviano, G.I.P. Growing Locations: Industry Location in a Model of Endogenous Growth. Eur. Econ. Rev. 1999, 43, 281–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barone, G.; Narciso, G. Organized Crime and Business Subsidies: Where Does the Money Go? J. Urban Econ. 2015, 86, 98–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, B.; Lu, Y. Geographic Concentration and Vertical Disintegration: Evidence from China. J. Urban Econ. 2009, 65, 294–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department of Operations of the Ministry of Railways (DOMR). China Railway Manual; The Commercial Press: Beijing, China, 1934. [Google Scholar]
- Bai, S. History of Transport in China; Wuhan University Press: Wuhan, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Feng, T.; Du, H.; Lin, Z.; Zuo, J. Spatial Spillover Effects of Environmental Regulations on Air Pollution: Evidence from Urban Agglomerations in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 272, 110998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Zhou, K.; Yang, S. Land Use Efficiency and Influencing Factors of Urban Agglomerations in China. Land Use Policy 2019, 88, 104143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Q.; Zeng, C.; Xie, P.; Tan, S.; Wu, J. Comparison of Urban Growth Patterns and Changes between Three Urban Agglomerations in China and Three Metropolises in the USA from 1995 to 2015. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 50, 101649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fishman, R.; Carrillo, P.; Russ, J. Long-Term Impacts of Exposure to High Temperatures on Human Capital and Economic Productivity. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2019, 93, 221–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, D.-Z.; Zhao, L. Pollution Havens and Industrial Agglomeration. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2009, 58, 141–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, M.; Cai, W.; Cai, W.; Dong, L. Whether Carbon Intensity in the Commercial Building Sector Decouples from Economic Development in the Service Industry? Empirical Evidence from the Top Five Urban Agglomerations in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 222, 193–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables | Definition | Sample Size | Mean | Std. Dev | Min | Max | Unit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
lnGD | Comprehensive evaluation of DPSIR model | 1540 | 2.626 | 0.367 | 1.807 | 3.616 | - |
lnMA | Location quotient index | 1540 | −0.231 | 0.57 | −2.052 | 0.859 | - |
lnEL | Per capita GDP | 1540 | 9.728 | 0.839 | 7.926 | 11.749 | Yuan per capita |
lnIL | Proportion of added value of the secondary sector to GDP | 1540 | −5.326 | 0.237 | −6.211 | −4.89 | % |
lnIS | Ratio of the output value of the tertiary sector to the output value of the secondary sector | 1540 | −0.261 | 0.345 | −1.043 | 0.756 | % |
lnER | Composite index | 1540 | −0.271 | 0.193 | −0.978 | −0.039 | - |
lnRD | Ratio of the total length of roads to the area of the administrative area at the end of the year | 1540 | 0.713 | 0.929 | −1.54 | 2.646 | % |
lnLU | Number of students per 10,000 people in higher education | 1540 | 5.874 | 0.386 | 5.461 | 7.235 | Persons |
lnIU | Ratio of the output value of the tertiary sector to the output value of the secondary sector | 1540 | −0.261 | 0.345 | −1.043 | 0.756 | % |
lnTI | Urban patent entitlement per capita | 1540 | 0.139 | 1.979 | −6.08 | 4.162 | Items |
Variables | OLS | FGLS | Spatial GMM | GS2SLS |
---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
lnMA | −0.132 *** | −0.109 *** | −0.088 *** | −0.585 *** |
(−9.83) | (−10.62) | (−5.93) | (−7.14) | |
(lnMA)2 | −0.0220 ** | −0.012 * | −0.010 | −0.167 * |
(−2.43) | (−1.73) | (−1.03) | (−1.74) | |
lnEL | −0.545 *** | −0.531 *** | −0.492 *** | −0.531 *** |
(−5.64) | (−6.92) | (−5.10) | (−4.24) | |
(lnEL)2 | 0.041 *** | 0.040 *** | 0.038 *** | 0.039 *** |
(8.33) | (10.44) | (7.84) | (6.13) | |
lnIL | −0.101 *** | −0.119 *** | −0.102 *** | 0.064 |
(−4.92) | (−6.94) | (−4.53) | (1.43) | |
lnER | 0.725 *** | 0.767 *** | 0.762 *** | 0.685 *** |
(26.88) | (34.42) | (28.22) | (20.45) | |
lnRD | 0.063 *** | 0.036 *** | 0.057 *** | 0.031 ** |
(8.83) | (6.31) | (6.71) | (2.06) | |
W*lnGD | 0.944 *** | |||
(10.70) | ||||
Constant | 3.646 *** | 3.464 *** | 3.365 *** | 3.965 *** |
(6.98) | (8.20) | (6.41) | (5.35) | |
City fixed effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Adjusted R2 | 0.821 | 0.991 | ||
Hausman test | 19.009 *** | |||
Sample size | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 |
Inflection point | 0.050 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.174 |
Variables | Inverse Squared Distance Matrix | Economic Geographic Distance Matrix | Replacing Core Explanatory Variable | Increasing Control Variables |
---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
lnMA | −0.771 *** | −1.057 *** | −0.582 ** | −0.339 *** |
(−6.58) | (−4.67) | (−2.28) | (−5.43) | |
(lnMA)2 | −0.315 ** | −0.519 ** | −0.020 ** | −0.123 ** |
(−2.12) | (−2.27) | (−2.23) | (−2.05) | |
lnHHI | −0.582 ** | −0.339 *** | ||
(−2.28) | (−5.43) | |||
(lnHHI)2 | −0.020 ** | −0.123 ** | ||
(−2.23) | (−2.05) | |||
W*lnGD | 132.613 *** | 0.000 *** | 0.875 *** | 1.131 *** |
(8.39) | (3.99) | (5.89) | (13.49) | |
Constant | 2.890 *** | 1.887 | 0.247 | 12.496 *** |
(3.15) | (1.23) | (0.17) | (6.40) | |
Control variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Meteorological factors | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Adjusted R2 | 0.9887 | 0.9861 | 0.9876 | 0.9946 |
Sample size | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 |
Variables | Old Normality (2003–2008) | New Normality (2009–2016) | Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomerations | Urban Agglomerations in the Middle Reach of the Yangtze River | Chengdu–Chongqing Urban Agglomerations | Resource-Based Cities | Non-Resource-Based Cities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (1) | (2) | (3) | (1) | (2) | |
lnMA | −0.355 *** | −0.248 ** | −0.359 *** | −0.145 | −1.624 ** | −0.851 *** | −0.693 *** |
(−3.97) | (−2.55) | (−3.80) | (−0.72) | (−2.46) | (−4.04) | (−6.36) | |
(lnMA)2 | 0.018 | −0.345 *** | 0.926 * | −0.627 ** | −1.134 ** | −0.495 *** | −0.175 |
(0.15) | (−4.94) | (1.83) | (−1.99) | (−2.23) | (−3.17) | (−1.39) | |
lnEL | −1.626 *** | −0.657 *** | 0.447 | −0.441 | −0.026 | −0.643 ** | −0.298 * |
(−6.45) | (−4.10) | (0.73) | (−1.50) | (−0.02) | (−2.03) | (−1.90) | |
(lnEL)2 | 0.104 *** | 0.044 *** | −0.005 | 0.034 ** | 0.013 | 0.045 *** | 0.025 *** |
(7.92) | (5.57) | (−0.15) | (2.27) | (0.23) | (2.82) | (3.11) | |
lnIL | −0.013 | −0.186 ** | −0.272 | −0.014 | −0.097 | −0.022 | 0.159 ** |
(−0.25) | (−2.12) | (−1.44) | (−0.22) | (−0.34) | (−0.29) | (2.15) | |
lnER | 0.580 *** | 0.509 *** | 1.109 *** | 0.831 *** | 0.648 *** | 0.733 *** | 0.698 *** |
(15.75) | (8.63) | (5.48) | (9.53) | (2.97) | (10.53) | (14.82) | |
lnRD | 0.046 ** | −0.038 * | −0.019 | −0.060 | 0.002 | 0.019 | 0.055 ** |
(2.49) | (−1.71) | (−0.54) | (−1.30) | (0.02) | (0.59) | (2.54) | |
W*lnGD | 0.173 | 0.534 *** | 0.707 | 1.453 *** | −0.410 | 2.467 *** | 1.547 *** |
(1.46) | (4.31) | (1.52) | (4.27) | (−0.49) | (4.36) | (7.45) | |
Constant | 8.422 *** | 3.776 *** | −2.903 | 3.410 ** | 1.276 | 4.031 ** | 3.462 *** |
(6.16) | (4.03) | (−0.75) | (2.26) | (0.20) | (2.36) | (3.65) | |
Adjusted R2 | 0.9920 | 0.9928 | 0.9915 | 0.9941 | 0.9555 | 0.9837 | 0.9901 |
Sample size | 660 | 880 | 364 | 392 | 224 | 560 | 980 |
Inflection point | - | 0.698 | 1.214 | 0.891 | 0.489 | 0.423 | - |
Variables | Total Effect | Labor Force Upgrading Effect | Industrial Structure Upgrading Effect | Technical Innovation Effect | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
lnGD | lnLU | lnGD | lnIU | lnGD | lnTI | lnGD | |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | |
lnMA | −0.884 *** | 0.551 *** | −0.662 *** | 0.249 ** | −0.875 *** | 2.105 *** | −0.655 *** |
(−7.50) | (2.82) | (−7.59) | (2.34) | (−7.70) | (3.25) | (−7.07) | |
(lnMA)2 | −0.395 *** | 0.476 *** | −0.164 * | 0.054 | −0.350 *** | 0.480 | −0.094 |
(−3.12) | (3.80) | (−1.72) | (0.54) | (−2.89) | (0.87) | (−0.96) | |
lnLU | 0.026 | ||||||
(0.68) | |||||||
lnIU | 0.056 | ||||||
(1.52) | |||||||
lnTI | 0.047 *** | ||||||
(6.01) | |||||||
lnEL | −0.474 *** | −0.917 *** | −0.549 *** | −0.909 *** | −0.457 *** | 1.183 ** | −0.564 *** |
(−3.04) | (−6.88) | (−3.97) | (−8.81) | (−2.87) | (2.36) | (−4.15) | |
(lnEL)2 | 0.036 *** | 0.053 *** | 0.039 *** | 0.048 *** | 0.035 *** | −0.036 | 0.038 *** |
(4.54) | (7.54) | (5.60) | (9.22) | (4.33) | (−1.39) | (5.48) | |
lnIL | 0.107 * | 0.022 | 0.104 ** | −0.929 *** | 0.188 *** | −0.303 * | 0.119 ** |
(1.89) | (0.51) | (2.12) | (−21.57) | (2.63) | (−1.80) | (2.44) | |
lnER | 0.685 *** | −0.027 | 0.684 *** | −0.094 *** | 0.691 *** | 0.113 | 0.636 *** |
(16.45) | (−0.88) | (18.90) | (−3.65) | (16.55) | (0.79) | (16.87) | |
lnRD | 0.036 * | 0.066 *** | 0.038 ** | −0.017 | 0.041 ** | 0.391 *** | 0.024 |
(1.92) | (5.02) | (2.28) | (−1.42) | (2.21) | (7.19) | (1.48) | |
W*lnGD | 0.936 *** | 0.951 *** | 0.936 *** | 0.760 *** | |||
(8.60) | (10.16) | (8.74) | (7.11) | ||||
W*lnLU | 0.022 | ||||||
(0.18) | |||||||
W*lnIU | 2.878 *** | ||||||
(16.46) | |||||||
W*lnTI | 0.022 | 2.830 *** | |||||
(0.18) | (22.75) | ||||||
Constant | 3.936 *** | 9.753 *** | 4.104 *** | −0.784 | 4.285 *** | −9.730 *** | 4.735 *** |
(4.27) | (13.40) | (4.66) | (−1.31) | (4.68) | (−3.50) | (5.86) | |
Sobel test (p-value) | −2.197 (0.028) | −2.077 (0.038) | 3.846 (0.000) | ||||
City fixed effect | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Sample size | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 | 1540 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yuan, H.; Zou, L.; Luo, X.; Feng, Y. How Does Manufacturing Agglomeration Affect Green Development? A Spatial and Nonlinear Perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10404. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610404
Yuan H, Zou L, Luo X, Feng Y. How Does Manufacturing Agglomeration Affect Green Development? A Spatial and Nonlinear Perspective. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(16):10404. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610404
Chicago/Turabian StyleYuan, Huaxi, Longhui Zou, Xiangyong Luo, and Yidai Feng. 2022. "How Does Manufacturing Agglomeration Affect Green Development? A Spatial and Nonlinear Perspective" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 16: 10404. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191610404