4.1. Spatial Graphing Assessment
Figure 2 shows the water usage efficiency of 29 provinces by year (2006–2020). It shows the average higher efficiency ranges between 1.01 and 1.23. The middle-efficiency ranges between 0.55–0.83. The lowest efficiency ranges between 0.21–0.49. Beijing (1.08), Shaanxi (1.01), Shanghai (1.23) and Tianjin (1.01) remained the higher efficient over the years. Six provinces (Guangdong, Shandong, Jiangsu, Inner Mongolia, Hebei and Zhejiang) are in the middle ranges (0.55–0.83). At the same time, nineteen provinces have the lowest water usage efficiency (0.21–049). Qinghai and Ningxia are on the lowest rank (0.21) and (0.22) in water usage efficiency, respectively.
Figure 3 shows the average water usage efficiency by region; the eastern region has the higher efficiency with the value of (0.727). The central region shows less efficiency in water usage (0.383). However, the western region shows the middle range of efficiency. Overall, the regions are not efficient in water usage. It shows that China needs to reform and focus on strategies to improve water usage efficiency.
Figure 4 shows the total water resources of all provinces from 2006–2020. Sichuan has the highest total water resources (37,690.11). Subsequently, Guangxi has the highest total water resources (29,394.47). In comparison, Beijing, Ningxia, Shanghai, Tianjin and Shanxi have less water resources. Beijing is situated in the northern area of China, characterized by an arid and semi-arid climate. Rainfall levels in this region are comparatively lower than in other regions of China, notably in the southern areas.
The municipality’s geographical positioning within a region characterized by aridity inherently constrains the availability of ample water supplies. The city of Beijing possesses a restricted number of natural water sources, such as rivers and lakes, within its territorial limits. However, in the water recycling
Figure 5, Beijing is at the top in recycling water.
4.2. Empirical Findings and Discussion
The descriptive statistics (
Table 1) provide valuable insights into various important aspects. The average water usage efficiency is moderate, with a mean value of 0.53. In contrast, the gross domestic product (GDP) has a comparatively high value of
$50,208. The availability of water resources demonstrates diversity among observations, with an average value of around 778.82. Water recycling exhibits significant variation, characterized by a mean value of 8545.81. The levels of sprinkling technology (technology for irrigation) also exhibit variation, as seen by a mean value of 121.23. There are significant variations in the presence and size of water reservoirs. The sizes of populations exhibit substantial variation, with an average of approximately 46.2 million. The secondary industry exhibits a mean value of 9392.62, whereas the education levels demonstrate considerable variation, with a mean value of 267,235.2. The statistics offer an initial comprehension of the dataset’s primary tendencies and variations, serving as a foundation for subsequent analysis and decision-making in diverse domains such as economics, water technology, water resource management, technology, and education planning.
Table 2 displays the outcomes of a cross-sectional dependency examination conducted on multiple variables. The obtained
p-values, all 0.000, provide substantial proof of the presence of cross-sectional dependency among the observations. This finding suggests that the variables under consideration are not independent of one another within the entire data set. The consistency of this dependency is highlighted by the consistent average joint T-statistic of 29.00 observed across all variables. Furthermore, the mean correlation coefficients (rho) exhibit a persistent positive trend, ranging from 0.84 to 1.00. This suggests a prevailing positive connection among the data for each variable. This suggests a relationship exists between changes in one variable and in other variables, emphasizing the importance of cross-sectional dependency in statistical analysis and modelling.
The unit root analysis shows (
Table 3) that “Water Usage Efficiency”, “GDP”, “Water Resources”, “Recycling”, “Irrigation Sprinkling Method”, “Water Reservoir”, “Population”, “Secondary Industry”, and “Education”, are stationary after their first differences. This means these variables are suitable for time series analysis and have no unit roots. For accurate and meaningful time series modelling, stationary data are needed to understand and predict economic and environmental patterns and relationships.
Table 4 shows cointegration test results for two models, “Water Resources” and “Water Technology”. Cointegration tests determine if variables move together across time. The “Water Resources” model has two test statistics. The first statistic, −1.9495, implies cointegration among variables in some panels (subsets of the data). This indicates long-term correlations between variables. The second statistic, −1.5521, shows weak cointegration in all panels. The
p-values (0.0256 and 0.0603) reflect the significance of these results. The table shows two test statistics for the “Water Technology” model. The first, −1.5278, suggests panel cointegration. The second value, −1.5957, shows cointegration in all panels. Again, the
p-values (0.0633 and 0.0553) show the significance of these findings. In conclusion, the “Water Resources” and “Water Technology” models show co-integration but with differing degrees of significance, showing that sets of variables within the panels are related across time. These correlations may vary in strength and importance across panels and models.
For long-run assessment, we applied the Driscoll & Kraay. The results are described in
Table 5. The study used three models: water-resources effects, water-saving-technology effects, and water resources-technology effects to assess the resource and technology impact. The primary focus of water resources (MD1) is to evaluate the effects of changes in water supplies on the efficiency of water usage. The observed coefficient of −0.0781 indicates a statistically significant negative relationship between the availability of water resources and water usage efficiency. This suggests that as the availability of water resources increases, there is a corresponding drop in water usage efficiency. From an economic perspective, it may be inferred that ample water resources could potentially reduce the motivation to adopt efficient water utilization strategies. This phenomenon may be attributed to the “tragedy of the commons” phenomenon when individuals or industries use a shared resource excessively when it is readily accessible without cost. In (MD2) we control the other economic effects to assess the dynamic impact of water resources on water usage efficiency.
The water resources impact (−0.0464) remains negative, showing that Although individuals may have access to a greater quantity of water, they may not necessarily perceive the imperative to utilize it efficiently. Territories with considerable water resources may exhibit a reduced motivation to allocate significant resources towards developing and implementing efficient water infrastructure and management systems [
55]. Cultural, economic, and legal issues affect how water resources and utilization efficiency relate in different places. Abundant water supplies managed efficiently and accompanied by educational and policy-driven measures to promote efficient use may minimize the negative link [
56]. The following MD3-MD6 columns show the water-water-saving-technology effects. The impact of water-saving mechanisms on the efficiency of water usage seems positive. The opined coefficient of (0.0203) indicates a statistically significant positive relationship, implying that recycling technology significantly enhances China’s water usage efficiency. It can be inferred that adopting such technology can enhance the efficiency of water usage, potentially lowering water-related expenses for both companies and homes [
57,
58]. The implementation of recycling technology contributes to enhancing water security by mitigating reliance on external water sources, particularly in locations that are susceptible to water scarcity [
59,
60].
Recycling water lessens demand on rivers, lakes, and aquifers [
60]. Recycling treated wastewater for irrigation, industrial processes, and cooling systems reduces the requirement for fresh water. This conserves freshwater for drinking and cooking [
61]. By adding water recycling, communities and enterprises become less dependent on one water source. Diversification strengthens droughts, water shortages, and other critical water supply disruptions. It ensures a more regular water supply, valuable for industries and agriculture. The utilization of recycling technology is under the fundamental tenets of a circular economy, which emphasizes the effective utilization, recycling, and utilization of resources, hence mitigating the necessity for fresh resource extraction and the development of trash. The use of circular water management practices facilitates the promotion of sustainability and the mitigation of environmental consequences. The increasing urban population in China demands recycling technology as a crucial component of urban water management. This technology can address growing urban water demand while mitigating the pressure on current water resources and infrastructure [
62].
In the following columns (MD4-MD6), again, the observed coefficient shows the positive correlation between water recycling and water usage efficiency. The use of sprinkler systems plays a significant role in water usage efficiency. These advanced irrigation methods can increase the efficiency of water utilization. The positive coefficients in MD4-MD6 (0.0347, 0.0175, 0.0154) show a positive correlation between sprinkler systems irrigation strategies and heightened water efficiency. The potential reason for this phenomenon can be attributed to these methodologies’ enhanced accuracy and control, resulting in decreased water consumption [
63,
64]. This practice effectively mitigates water loss caused by runoff and evaporation, hence enhancing the efficiency of water delivery to plants in the areas where it is most required. Irrigation sprinkling reduces waste, conserves water, and promotes ecologically sound farming by precisely targeting and monitoring the water supply to crops. The third important water-saving component is the water reservoirs.
The impact of water reservoirs is positive to increase the water usage efficiency. Water reservoirs can potentially improve the efficiency of water usage by providing a consistent and dependable water supply. Moreover, they can mitigate the effects of seasonal fluctuations, facilitate hydropower generation, enhance ecosystems, provide recreational activities, act as a contingency water source during emergencies, and alleviate the strain on groundwater resources [
65]. Reservoirs are crucial in serving as a vital emergency water supply during catastrophes, offering drinkable water to impacted communities where alternative supplies may be disrupted [
66]. The last two columns describe the combined effects of water resources and technology with the controlled parameters. The results show that water technology is more efficient than water resources to increase water usage efficiency. The impact of economic development (GDP) on water usage efficiency is negative throughout the regressions. It implies that during the early stages of economic development, there is a possibility for increasing demand for water-intensive activities such as industrial production and agriculture, which can potentially lead to a decline in water efficiency. However, the positive coefficient for the square of GDP (0.0313, 0.0334) suggests that as GDP increases, the rate of decrease in water usage efficiency slows down. The findings suggest that once economies attain a specific development threshold, they allocate greater resources towards implementing water conservation and efficiency measures.
In all models, it is observed that population has a detrimental effect on water usage efficiency. As the population grows, there is a tendency for water efficiency to decline. From an economic perspective, there is a correlation between increased water consumption for home and industrial purposes in densely populated regions, which can exert pressure on water supplies. Both factors have positive coefficients, suggesting increased secondary industry and education involvement may enhance water usage efficiency. This implies that implementing economic diversification and education initiatives can potentially result in adopting more sustainable water management methods.
Table 6 shows the synergy of water resource agglomeration and conservation technologies’ impact on water usage efficiency. MD1 coefficient of −0.0832 implies that water usage efficiency decreases with water resource increase. This suggests that the availability of abundant water supplies may reduce the incentive to adopt optimal water utilization practices. Similarly, recycling and sprinkling have a positive impact, indicating that adopting recycling practices is associated with higher water usage efficiency. In MD1-MD2 and MD3, the study uses the mediating impact of different methods and technology with water resources. The findings indicated that the interaction terms of recycling, sprinkling, and reservoirs with water resources are statistically significant, indicating that the relationship between water resources and water usage efficiency depends on the other factors. Just abundant water resources are not enough if it is not managed efficiently. Other economic factors, such as population economic development, can increase the demand for water and put pressure on the water resources. So, the provinces need to manage them efficiently to meet the requirements. Education can play an essential role as an awareness tool among the people and use the water efficiently.