The Cause of China’s Haze Pollution: City Level Evidence Based on the Extended STIRPAT Model
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Methodology
2.2. Variable and Data
3. Results
3.1. Stationarity Test
3.2. Extended STIRPAT Model of 255 Cities
3.3. Quantile Regression by Different Population Size
4. Discussion
4.1. The Discussion of Expanded STIRPAT Model Results
4.2. The Differences between Driving Indicators on Cities according to Different Population Sizes
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, H.; Mu, H.; Zhang, M.; Li, N. Analysis on Influence Factors of China’s CO2 Emissions Based on Path–STIRPAT Model. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 6906–6911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, D.; Chen, H.; Li, X.; Ma, X. Air Pollution and Its Influential Factors in China’s Hot Spots. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 185, 619–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hering, L.; Poncet, S. Environmental Policy and Exports: Evidence from Chinese Cities. J. Environ. Econ. 2014, 68, 296–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, Y.; Liu, Y. The Influential Factors of Urban PM2.5 Concentrations in China: A Spatial Econometric Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 1443–1453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, K.; Dong, X.; Dong, C. Determinants of the Global and Regional CO2 Emissions: What Causes What and Where? Appl. Econ. 2019, 51, 5031–5044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diao, B.; Zeng, K.; Su, P.; Ding, L.; Liu, C. Temporal-Spatial Distribution Characteristics of Provincial Industrial NOx Emissions and Driving Factors in China from 2006 to 2013. Resour. Sci. 2016, 38, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miao, Z.; Baležentis, T.; Shao, S.; Chang, D. Energy Use, Industrial Soot and Vehicle Exhaust Pollution—China’s Regional Air Pollution Recognition, Performance Decomposition and Governance. Energy Econ. 2019, 83, 501–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Shan, H. Identifying Driving Factors of Jiangsu’s Regional Sulfur Dioxide Emissions: A Generalized Divisia Index Method. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Weng, Z.; Ma, Z.; Ge, C.; Cheng, C. Analysis on Urban Environmental Effect Driven by Multi-Factors of China: Based on Panel Data of 285 Prefecture Level Cities. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2017, 27, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lelieveld, J.; Evans, J.S.; Fnais, M.; Giannadaki, D.; Pozzer, A. The Contribution of Outdoor Air Pollution Sources to Premature Mortality on a Global Scale. Nature 2015, 525, 367–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Zhou, C.; Wang, Z.; Feng, K.; Hubacek, K. The Characteristics and Drivers of Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Distribution in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 1800–1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.; Li, F.; Zhang, J.; Zhou, W.; Wang, X.; Fu, H. Spatiotemporal Mapping and Multiple Driving Forces Identifying of PM2.5 Variation and Its Joint Management Strategies across China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 250, 119534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Q.; Wang, S.; Zhang, W.; Li, J.; Dong, G. The Effect of Natural and Anthropogenic Factors on PM2.5: Empirical Evidence from Chinese Cities with Different Income Levels. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 653, 157–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Y.; Li, J.; Zhu, G.; Guan, X.; Zhu, W. The Impact of Multi-Dimensional Urbanization on PM2.5 Concentrations in 261 Cities of China. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 96199–96209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, D.; Ren, X.; Kong, Y.; Ye, B.; Liao, Z. The Heterogeneous Effects of Socioeconomic Determinants on PM2.5 Concentrations Using a Two-Step Panel Quantile Regression. Appl. Energy 2020, 272, 115246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, X.; Li, S.; Zhang, S.; Huang, H.; Chen, S.X. PM2.5 Data Reliability, Consistency, and Air Quality Assessment in Five Chinese Cities. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2016, 121, 10–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, B.; Jiang, Z. Environmental Kuznets Curve Prediction and Influencing Factors of CO2 in China. Manag. World 2009, 4, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, Y.; Liao, H.; Wei, Y. Environmental Kuznets Curve of Energy Consumption and Electricity Consumption in China Based on Spatial Econometric Modeling of Panel Data. China Soft Sci. Mag. 2014, 1, 134–141. [Google Scholar]
- Li, L.; Liu, X.; Ge, J.; Chu, X.; Wang, J. Regional Differences in Spatial Spillover and Hysteresis Effects: A Theoretical and Empirical Study of Environmental Regulations on Haze Pollution in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 230, 1096–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, W.; Zhang, M.; Ding, Y. Exploring the Effect of Economic and Environment Factors on PM2.5 Concentration: A Case Study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 268, 110703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, W.; Wang, H.; Zhao, H.; Wei, Y. Temporal-Spatial Characteristics and Key Influence Factors of PM2.5 Concentrations in China Based on STIRPAT Model and Kuznets Curve. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 2019, 18, 2587–2604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, D.; Wang, X.; Xu, J.; Xu, C.; Lu, D.; Ye, C.; Wang, Z.; Bai, L. Quantifying the Influence of Natural and Socioeconomic Factors and Their Interactive Impact on PM2.5 Pollution in China. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 241, 475–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, C.; Wang, Q.; Qin, Q.; Ren, H.; Cao, J. Impacts of Natural and Socioeconomic Factors on PM2.5 from 2014 to 2017. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 284, 112071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, M.; Sun, X.; Wang, W. Study on the Effect of Environmental Regulations and Industrial Structure on Haze Pollution in China from the Dual Perspective of Independence and Linkage. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, D.; Xu, J.; Yang, D.; Zhao, J. Spatio-Temporal Variation and Influence Factors of PM2.5 Concentrations in China from 1998 to 2014. Atmos. Pollut. Res. 2017, 8, 1151–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Duan, X.; Wang, L. Spatial-Temporal Evolution of PM2.5 Concentration and Its Socioeconomic Influence Factors in Chinese Cities in 2014–2017. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhou, C.; Chen, J.; Wang, S. Examining the Effects of Socioeconomic Development on Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) in China’s Cities Using Spatial Regression and the Geographical Detector Technique. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 619, 436–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, D.; Lei, Y.; Shi, Y.; Zhu, Q.; Li, L.; Zhang, Z. Evolution of the Spatiotemporal Pattern of PM2.5 Concentrations in China–A Case Study from the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region. Atmos. Environ. 2018, 183, 225–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yan, J.; Tao, F.; Zhang, S.-Q.; Lin, S.; Zhou, T. Spatiotemporal Distribution Characteristics and Driving Forces of PM2.5 in Three Urban Agglomerations of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagashima, F. Critical Structural Paths of Residential PM2.5 Emissions within the Chinese Provinces. Energy Econ. 2018, 70, 465–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, K.; Li, G.; Fang, C.; Sun, S. PM2.5 Mitigation in China: Socioeconomic Determinants of Concentrations and Differential Control Policies. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 213, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, S.; Xie, J.; Xiao, D.; Zhang, Y. Measuring the Environmental Efficiency and Technology Gap of PM2.5 in China’s Ten City Groups: An Empirical Analysis Using the EBM Meta-Frontier Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Koenker, R.; Bassett, G., Jr. Regression Quantiles. Econometrica 1978, 46, 33–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furno, M.; Vistocco, D. Quantile Regression: Estimation and Simulation; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; Volume 216. [Google Scholar]
- Lew, A.A.; Ng, P.T. Using Quantile Regression to Understand Visitor Spending. J. Travel Res. 2012, 51, 278–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, D.; Li, G.; He, F. Exploring PM2.5 Environmental Efficiency and Its Influencing Factors in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kiliç, C.; Balan, F. Is There an Environmental Kuznets Inverted-U Shaped Curve? Panoeconomicus 2018, 65, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Feng, Y.; Wang, X. Effects of Urban Sprawl on Haze Pollution in China Based on Dynamic Spatial Durbin Model during 2003–2016. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, G.; Liu, S.; Lei, N.; Huang, Y. A Test of Environmental Kuznets Curve for Haze Pollution in China: Evidence from the Penal Data of 27 Capital Cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 205, 821–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, Y.; Zhang, M.; Chen, S.; Wang, W.; Nie, R. The Environmental Kuznets Curve for PM2.5 Pollution in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region of China: A Spatial Panel Data Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 220, 984–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azam, M. Does Environmental Degradation Shackle Economic Growth? A Panel Data Investigation on 11 Asian Countries. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2016, 65, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azam, M.; Khan, A.Q. Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Comparative Empirical Study for Low, Lower Middle, Upper Middle and High Income Countries. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2016, 63, 556–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Apergis, N.; Christou, C.; Gupta, R. Are There Environmental Kuznets Curves for US State-Level CO2 Emissions? Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2017, 69, 551–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ehrlich, P.R.; Holdren, J.P. Impact of Population Growth. Science 1971, 171, 1212–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, P.; Wu, W.; Zhu, B.; Wei, Y. Examining the Impact Factors of Energy-Related CO2 Emissions Using the STIRPAT Model in Guangdong Province, China. Appl. Energy 2013, 106, 65–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, S.; Wang, S. Examining the Effects of Socioeconomic Development on China’s Carbon Productivity: A Panel Data Analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 659, 681–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, D.I. The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve. World Dev. 2004, 32, 1419–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levin, A.; Lin, C.-F.; Chu, C.-S.J. Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. J. Econom. 2002, 108, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maddala, G.S.; Wu, S. A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test. Oxford. B Econ. Stat. 1999, 61, 631–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kao, C. Spurious Regression and Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Panel Data. J. Econom. 1999, 90, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pedroni, P. Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors. Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 1999, 61, 653–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pedroni, P. Panel Cointegration: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis. Econom. Theory 2004, 20, 597–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Variable | Definition | Units of Measurement | Mean | Median | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PM2.5 | PM2.5 emissions concentration | 45.71 | 43.02 | 18.09 | 8.70 | 104.30 | |
PD | Population density | 459.15 | 393.21 | 332.59 | 4.82 | 2648.11 | |
GDP | Per capita gross domestic product | 10,000 Yuan | 1786.00 | 991.03 | 2722.38 | 66.13 | 71,340.28 |
SE | Scientific expenditures | 10,000 Yuan | 70,652.13 | 18,797.00 | 238,982.50 | 469 | 4,035,240.00 |
TEC | Total electricity consumption | Billion kWh | 156.41 | 102.59 | 175.52 | 2.25 | 1486.02 |
FI | Foreign investment | 10,000 Dollars | 84,956.71 | 22,596 | 196,498.10 | 16.00 | 3,082,563.00 |
PSP | Ratio of secondary industry to GDP | % | 49.86 | 50.16 | 9.67 | 18.57 | 85.08 |
Unit Root Tests | Variable | LLC | Fish-ADF |
---|---|---|---|
Horizontal Sequence | lnPM2.5 | −15.4620 *** | 13.4164 *** |
lnPD | −3.3360 *** | −1.2033 | |
lnGDP | −49.3459 *** | 47.0489 *** | |
lnSE | −18.9008 *** | 6.3799 *** | |
lnTEC | −20.5336 *** | 5.1772 *** | |
lnFI | −12.8356 *** | 5.6464 *** | |
lnPSP | −3.7413 *** | 2.9823 *** | |
First difference | lnPM2.5 | −2.0958 *** | 5.2782 *** |
lnPD | −15.2374 *** | 9.6203 *** | |
lnGDP | −38.8361 *** | 16.4137 *** | |
lnSE | −31.7062 *** | 13.7043 *** | |
lnTEC | −82.8749 *** | 59.3129 *** | |
lnFI | −60.2082 *** | 30.7214 *** | |
lnPSP | 4.9806 *** | 9.6083 *** |
Test Method | Statistics | Statistics Value |
---|---|---|
Kao test | ADF | −18.9077 *** |
Pedroni test | Panel PP | −57.0751 *** |
Panel ADF | −42.8427 *** |
Variable | OLS | Fixed Effects | Random Effects |
---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) |
lnPD | 0.220 *** | 0.172 *** | 0.164 *** |
(0.025) | (0.048) | (0.029) | |
lnGDP | 0.523 ** | 0.558 ** | 0.563 ** |
(0.264) | (0.226) | (0.262) | |
(lnGDP)2 | −0.075 ** | −0.080 ** | −0.081 ** |
(0.036) | (0.036) | (0.036) | |
(lnGDP)3 | 0.003 * | 0.003 * | 0.003 ** |
(0.0016) | (0.002) | (0.002) | |
lnSE | −0.051 *** | −0.048 *** | −0.047 *** |
(0.006) | (0.004) | (0.006) | |
lnTEC | 0.013 | 0.011 * | 0.011 |
(0.009) | (0.006) | (0.009) | |
lnFI | 0.012 *** | 0.011 *** | 0.011 *** |
(0.003) | (0.001) | (0.003) | |
lnPSP | −0.059 ** | −0.058 ** | −0.060 ** |
(0.026) | (0.026) | (0.026) | |
Isize2 | 0.487 *** | 0.491 *** | |
(0.013) | (0.185) | ||
Isize3 | 0.668 *** | 0.678 *** | |
(0.045) | (0.190) | ||
Isize4 | 0.872 *** | 0.886 *** | |
(0.064) | (0.213) | ||
cons | 1.973 *** | 1.622 ** | 1.667 ** |
(0.656) | (0.570) | (0.670) | |
Hausman test | 46.07 *** (Prob > chi = 0.000) | ||
The shape of EKC | N-shaped |
Variable | Type I | Type II | Type III | Type IV |
---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) |
QR_25 | ||||
lnPD | 0.064 | 0.353 *** | 0.343 *** | −1.184 |
(0.059) | (0.072) | (0.022) | (2.066) | |
lnGDP | 36.893 *** | −0.508 | 3.766 ** | −132.832 |
(12.299) | (5.852) | (1.806) | (187.802) | |
(lnGDP) 2 | −4.319 *** | −0.031 | −0.524 * | 24.446 |
(1.412) | (0.772) | (0.279) | (34.582) | |
(lnGDP) 3 | 0.164 *** | 0.004 | 0.025 * | −1.499 |
(0.054) | (0.034) | (0.014) | (2.124) | |
lnSE | −0.035 | 0.091 *** | −0.068 *** | 0.050 |
(0.058) | (0.031) | (0.014) | (0.459) | |
lnTEC | 0.557 *** | −0.032 | −0.007 | 0.808 |
(0.112) | (0.054) | (0.018) | (0.482) | |
lnFI | 0.087 * | 0.096 *** | −0.019 ** | 0.088 |
(0.050) | (0.024) | (0.008) | (0.190) | |
lnPSP | −0.549 *** | −0.203 | 0.421 *** | 0.637 |
(0.186) | (0.160) | (0.090) | (0.599) | |
_cons | −100.563 *** | 4.447 | −8.302 ** | 243.430 |
(35.434) | (14.793) | (3.936) | (342.007) | |
QR_50 | ||||
lnPD | 0.141 * | 0.428 *** | 0.333 *** | −0.824 |
(0.078) | (0.032) | (0.013) | (1.343) | |
lnGDP | 32.408 *** | 0.333 | 4.885 | −113.113 |
(11.645) | (3.207) | (3.304) | (108.114) | |
(lnGDP) 2 | −3.818 *** | −0.036 | −0.705 | 20.916 |
(1.355) | (0.427) | (0.483) | (19.736) | |
(lnGDP) 3 | 0.146 *** | 0.001 | 0.034 | −1.287 |
(0.052) | (0.019) | (0.023) | (1.201) | |
lnSE | 0.078 | −0.033 | −0.056 *** | −0.007 |
(0.065) | (0.028) | (0.011) | (0.295) | |
lnTEC | 0.363 *** | −0.005 | −0.034 *** | 0.295 |
(0.110) | (0.023) | (0.012) | (0.289) | |
lnFI | 0.068 | −0.025 * | −0.013 ** | 0.070 |
(0.043) | (0.014) | (0.006) | (0.152) | |
lnPSP | −0.214 | 0.254 *** | 0.319 *** | 0.876 ** |
(0.153) | (0.088) | (0.057) | (0.334) | |
_cons | −88.946 *** | 0.104 | −9.985 | 206.373 |
(33.277) | (7.979) | (7.455) | (198.116) | |
QR_75 | ||||
lnPD | −0.052 | 0.451 *** | 0.289 *** | −0.390 |
(0.130) | (0.027) | (0.021) | (0.910) | |
lnGDP | 20.410 | −0.174 | −0.567 | −67.150 |
(12.892) | (3.215) | (3.391) | (81.754) | |
(lnGDP) 2 | −2.412 | 0.058 | 0.050 | 12.531 |
(1.515) | (0.432) | (0.498) | (14.908) | |
(lnGDP) 3 | 0.092 | −0.004 | −0.000 | −0.778 |
(1.515) | (0.432) | (0.498) | (14.908) | |
lnSE | 0.096 | −0.057 *** | −0.052 *** | −0.093 |
(0.080) | (0.017) | (0.014) | (0.209) | |
lnTEC | 0.166 | −0.014 | −0.032 | 0.309 |
(0.188) | (0.016) | (0.021) | (0.231) | |
lnFI | 0.054 | −0.056 *** | −0.007 | 0.104 |
(0.043) | (0.014) | (0.009) | (0.126) | |
lnPSP | 0.111 | 0.234 ** | 0.279 *** | 0.939 *** |
(0.197) | (0.092) | (0.057) | (0.219) | |
_cons | −54.477 | 1.314 | 3.475 | 120.487 |
(36.651) | (7.956) | (7.660) | (149.651) |
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
Li, J.; Cheng, J.; Wen, Y.; Cheng, J.; Ma, Z.; Hu, P.; Jiang, S. The Cause of China’s Haze Pollution: City Level Evidence Based on the Extended STIRPAT Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4597. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084597
Li J, Cheng J, Wen Y, Cheng J, Ma Z, Hu P, Jiang S. The Cause of China’s Haze Pollution: City Level Evidence Based on the Extended STIRPAT Model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(8):4597. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084597
Chicago/Turabian StyleLi, Jingyuan, Jinhua Cheng, Yang Wen, Jingyu Cheng, Zhong Ma, Peiqi Hu, and Shurui Jiang. 2022. "The Cause of China’s Haze Pollution: City Level Evidence Based on the Extended STIRPAT Model" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 8: 4597. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084597