中国地方财政支出变化对环境污染影响的研究
|
摘要
基于中国30个省份2007—2015年的面板数据,选取工业固体废物污染、工业废水污染、工业二氧化硫污染等三种不同类型环境污染,分别采用空间计量模型和普通面板回归模型,对地方财政支出结构和规模变化对不同类型环境污染的影响进行了评估。研究结果表明:工业固体废物污染和工业废水污染具有较强空间正相关性,呈现出局部"俱乐部"特征;地方财政支出变化对环境污染的影响具有异质性,优化地方财政支出结构能降低工业废水污染和工业二氧化硫污染,而地方财政支出规模上升则加剧了工业固体废物污染;地方财政支出变化对相邻地区环境污染具有正向空间溢出影响,表明地方政府的同时,是以牺牲周围地区环境质量为代价在促进自身社会经济发展。
Scientifically planning local fiscal expenditures to cope with the current severe ecological environment is an inevitable requirement for promoting ecological civilization construction and high-quality development. Based on the panel data of 30 provinces in China from 2007 to 2015,three different types of environmental pollution( industrial solid waste pollution,industrial wastewater pollution,industrial sulfur dioxide pollution) were selected as explanatory variables. According to whether the spatial correlation of pollutants was significant or not,spatial econometric models and common panel ones are used to estimate the impact of fiscal expenditure structure and scale changes on different types of environmental pollution. The results show that: firstly,industrial solid waste pollution and industrial wastewater pollution have a strong spatial positive correlation, showing local club characteristics;secondly,the impact of local fiscal expenditure changes on environmental pollution is heterogeneous.Optimizing local fiscal expenditure structure can reduce industrial wastewater pollution and industrial sulfur dioxide pollution, while the increase in local fiscal expenditures has significantly increased industrial solid waste pollution; finally,local fiscal expenditure changes have positive spatial spillover effects on environmental pollution in adjacent areas, indicating that local governments sacrifice environmental quality of the surrounding area in its development process.
Scientifically planning local fiscal expenditures to cope with the current severe ecological environment is an inevitable requirement for promoting ecological civilization construction and high-quality development. Based on the panel data of 30 provinces in China from 2007 to 2015,three different types of environmental pollution( industrial solid waste pollution,industrial wastewater pollution,industrial sulfur dioxide pollution) were selected as explanatory variables. According to whether the spatial correlation of pollutants was significant or not,spatial econometric models and common panel ones are used to estimate the impact of fiscal expenditure structure and scale changes on different types of environmental pollution. The results show that: firstly,industrial solid waste pollution and industrial wastewater pollution have a strong spatial positive correlation, showing local club characteristics;secondly,the impact of local fiscal expenditure changes on environmental pollution is heterogeneous.Optimizing local fiscal expenditure structure can reduce industrial wastewater pollution and industrial sulfur dioxide pollution, while the increase in local fiscal expenditures has significantly increased industrial solid waste pollution; finally,local fiscal expenditure changes have positive spatial spillover effects on environmental pollution in adjacent areas, indicating that local governments sacrifice environmental quality of the surrounding area in its development process.
引文
[1] CARLSSON F,SUSANNA LUNDSTRM. Political and economic freedom and the environment:the case of CO2emissions[EB/OL].(2000-09-27)[2019-06-19]. http:∥efdinitiative. org/publications/political-and-economic-freedom-and-environment-case-co2-emissions.
[2] BERNAUER T,KOUBI V. States as providers of public goods:how does government size affect environmental quality[EB/OL].(2006-05-11)[2019-06-19]. http:∥dx. doi. org/10. 2139/ssrn. 900487.
[3]屈小娥，袁晓玲．中国地区能源强度差异及影响因素分析[J]．经济学家，2009(9):68-74.
[4] BERNAUER T,KOUBI V. Are bigger governments better providers of public goods? Evidence from air pollution[J]. Public Choice,2013,156:593-609.
[5]关海玲，张鹏．财政支出、公共产品供给与环境污染[J]．工业技术经济，2013(10):46-54.
[6] HALKOS G E,PAIZANOS,EPAMEINONDAS A. The effect of government expenditure on the environment:an empirical investigation[J]. Ecological Economics,2013,91(91):48-56.
[7]冯海波，方元子．地方财政支出的环境效应分析———来自中国城市的经验考察[J]．财贸经济，2014(2):30-43.
[8]卢洪友，田丹．中国财政支出对环境质量影响的实证分析[J]．中国地质大学学报(社会科学版)，2014,14(4):44-51+139-140.
[9] RAMN LPEZ,GALINATO G I,ISLAM A. Fiscal spending and the environment:theory and empirics[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2011,62(2):180-198.
[10] GALINATO G,ASIF I. The challenge of addressing consumption pollutants with fiscal policy[J]. Environment and Development Economics,2014,22(5):1-24.
[11]王艺明，张佩，邓可斌．财政支出结构与环境污染:碳排放的视角[J]．财政研究，2014(9):27-30.
[12]陈思霞，卢洪友．公共支出结构与环境质量:中国的经验分析[J]．经济评论，2014(1):70-80.
[13]邓彦龙．财政支出结构与环境污染———基于面板门槛模型的实证研究[J]．生态经济，2017,33(8):184-188.
[14] MADDISON D. Environmental Kuznets curves:a spatial econometric approach[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2006,51(2):218-230.
[15] HOSSEINI H M,KANEKO S. Can environmental quality spread through institutions[J]. Energy Policy,2013(56):312-321.
[16] POON J H,CASAS I,HE C. The impact of energy,transport,and trade on air pollution in China[J]. Eurasian Geography&Economics,2006,47(5):568-584.
[17] RUPASINGHA A,GOETZ S J,DEBERTIN D L,et al. The environmental Kuznets curve for US counties:A spatial econometric analysis with extensions[J]. Papers in Regional Science,2004,83(2):407-424.
[18]杨海生，周永章，王夕子．我国城市环境库兹涅茨曲线的空间计量检验[J]．统计与决策，2008(10):43-46.
[19]闫海波．中国省级地下经济与环境污染———空间计量经济学模型的实证[J]．中国人口·资源与环境，2012,141(S2):275-280.
[20]许和连，邓玉萍．外商直接投资导致了中国的环境污染吗———基于中国省际面板数据的空间计量研究[J]．管理世界，2012(2):30-43.
[21]王连芬，张静蕊．中国城市化对环境质量影响的空间计量分析[J]．统计与决策，2018,34(11):86-89.
[22]洪源，袁莙健，陈丽．财政分权、环境财政政策与地方环境污染———基于收支双重维度的门槛效应及空间外溢效应分析[J]．山西财经大学学报，2018,40(7):1-15.
[23]李涛，刘思玥，刘会．财政行为空间互动是否加剧了雾霾污染———基于财政—环境联邦主义的考察[J]．现代财经(天津财经大学学报)，2018,38(6):3-19.
[24]马海涛，师玉朋．政府主导工业化与雾霾污染的交互影响及空间外溢效应[J]．新疆财经大学学报，2017(1):5-15.
[25]杨万平，赵金凯．中国人居生态环境质量的时空差异及影响因素研究[J]．华东经济管理，2018,32(2):58-67.
[26]吴玉鸣，田斌．省域环境库兹涅茨曲线的扩展及其决定因素———空间计量经济学模型实证[J]．地理研究，2012,31(4):627-640.
[2] BERNAUER T,KOUBI V. States as providers of public goods:how does government size affect environmental quality[EB/OL].(2006-05-11)[2019-06-19]. http:∥dx. doi. org/10. 2139/ssrn. 900487.
[3]屈小娥，袁晓玲．中国地区能源强度差异及影响因素分析[J]．经济学家，2009(9):68-74.
[4] BERNAUER T,KOUBI V. Are bigger governments better providers of public goods? Evidence from air pollution[J]. Public Choice,2013,156:593-609.
[5]关海玲，张鹏．财政支出、公共产品供给与环境污染[J]．工业技术经济，2013(10):46-54.
[6] HALKOS G E,PAIZANOS,EPAMEINONDAS A. The effect of government expenditure on the environment:an empirical investigation[J]. Ecological Economics,2013,91(91):48-56.
[7]冯海波，方元子．地方财政支出的环境效应分析———来自中国城市的经验考察[J]．财贸经济，2014(2):30-43.
[8]卢洪友，田丹．中国财政支出对环境质量影响的实证分析[J]．中国地质大学学报(社会科学版)，2014,14(4):44-51+139-140.
[9] RAMN LPEZ,GALINATO G I,ISLAM A. Fiscal spending and the environment:theory and empirics[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2011,62(2):180-198.
[10] GALINATO G,ASIF I. The challenge of addressing consumption pollutants with fiscal policy[J]. Environment and Development Economics,2014,22(5):1-24.
[11]王艺明，张佩，邓可斌．财政支出结构与环境污染:碳排放的视角[J]．财政研究，2014(9):27-30.
[12]陈思霞，卢洪友．公共支出结构与环境质量:中国的经验分析[J]．经济评论，2014(1):70-80.
[13]邓彦龙．财政支出结构与环境污染———基于面板门槛模型的实证研究[J]．生态经济，2017,33(8):184-188.
[14] MADDISON D. Environmental Kuznets curves:a spatial econometric approach[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2006,51(2):218-230.
[15] HOSSEINI H M,KANEKO S. Can environmental quality spread through institutions[J]. Energy Policy,2013(56):312-321.
[16] POON J H,CASAS I,HE C. The impact of energy,transport,and trade on air pollution in China[J]. Eurasian Geography&Economics,2006,47(5):568-584.
[17] RUPASINGHA A,GOETZ S J,DEBERTIN D L,et al. The environmental Kuznets curve for US counties:A spatial econometric analysis with extensions[J]. Papers in Regional Science,2004,83(2):407-424.
[18]杨海生，周永章，王夕子．我国城市环境库兹涅茨曲线的空间计量检验[J]．统计与决策，2008(10):43-46.
[19]闫海波．中国省级地下经济与环境污染———空间计量经济学模型的实证[J]．中国人口·资源与环境，2012,141(S2):275-280.
[20]许和连，邓玉萍．外商直接投资导致了中国的环境污染吗———基于中国省际面板数据的空间计量研究[J]．管理世界，2012(2):30-43.
[21]王连芬，张静蕊．中国城市化对环境质量影响的空间计量分析[J]．统计与决策，2018,34(11):86-89.
[22]洪源，袁莙健，陈丽．财政分权、环境财政政策与地方环境污染———基于收支双重维度的门槛效应及空间外溢效应分析[J]．山西财经大学学报，2018,40(7):1-15.
[23]李涛，刘思玥，刘会．财政行为空间互动是否加剧了雾霾污染———基于财政—环境联邦主义的考察[J]．现代财经(天津财经大学学报)，2018,38(6):3-19.
[24]马海涛，师玉朋．政府主导工业化与雾霾污染的交互影响及空间外溢效应[J]．新疆财经大学学报，2017(1):5-15.
[25]杨万平，赵金凯．中国人居生态环境质量的时空差异及影响因素研究[J]．华东经济管理，2018,32(2):58-67.
[26]吴玉鸣，田斌．省域环境库兹涅茨曲线的扩展及其决定因素———空间计量经济学模型实证[J]．地理研究，2012,31(4):627-640.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |