基于两阶段Super-NSBM模型的城市生态福利绩效评价研究
|
摘要
如何在生态门槛内为城市居民实现福利水平的持续提升即城市生态福利绩效的提高是城市生态文明建设和可持续发展的根本要求和必然选择。本文从生态福利视角出发,基于DEA方法构建城市生态福利绩效评价指标体系,并运用两阶段考虑非合意产出的Super-NSBM模型和DEA窗口分析法测算了中国35个主要城市2011—2015年的生态福利绩效,将生态福利绩效分解为生态经济效率和经济福利效率两阶段,打开城市生态福利转化过程的"黑箱",并通过冗余度分析为各城市指明效率改进的方向。研究发现:"十二五"期间,我国35个主要城市的整体生态福利绩效水平不高,且城市之间差异较大,总体上未能实现DEA有效,但近几年呈现出逐年改善的利好趋势。分阶段效率来看,第二阶段的经济福利效率高于第一阶段的生态经济效率,生态经济效率偏低是导致整体生态福利绩效水平不高的主要原因。分区域来看,城市生态福利绩效综合水平呈现出"中部最高、东部次之、西部最低"的态势。与传统的单阶段("黑箱"评价)视角下考虑非合意产出Super-SBM模型相比,两阶段视角下基于考虑非合意产出的超效率网络SBM模型的测算结果精确度更高,再次验证了本文选取该模型的合理性。为提高城市生态福利绩效,促进城市生态文明建设与可持续发展,提出低效率城市应加快产业结构转型、发展绿色生态产业;有效推进京津冀城市群协同发展;建设公共交通导向的紧凑型低碳城市等建议。
How to sustain a high level of well-being with the ecological limits for urban inhabitants,in other words,to improve urban ecological well-being performance( hereinafter refers to UEWP),is the basic requirement and inevitable choice of urban ecological civilization construction and sustainable development. Firstly,this paper establishes the evaluation index system of UEWP based on the DEA method from the perspective of ecological well-being. Then,the UEWP of China 's 35 major cities during 2011-2015 is measured by using two-stage super-efficiency network SBM model with the consideration of undesirable outputs and DEA window analysis method,in which the‘black box'is opened by dividing UEWP into ecological efficiency and economic well-being efficiency from a two-stage angle. Last,the direction for improvement of the inefficient cities is pointed out in terms of slacks analysis. The research shows that: ①During the Twelve Five Year Plan period,the overall efficiency of 35 major cities in China was at a low level with average efficiency of 0. 813,which failed in standing on the DEA efficient frontier. ② From the two-stage perspective,the economic well-being efficiency in the second stage is much bigger than the ecological efficiency in the first stage,and the ecological efficiency with a relatively lower level mainly contributes to a relatively low UEWP in the whole period. ③As for three regions in terms of UEWP,the middle area ranks first,the eastern area ranks the second and the western area ranks the last. ④ Comparatively speaking,the DEA efficiency measured by two-stage super-efficiency network SBM model with the consideration of undesirable outputs is relatively lower than that measured by traditional SBM model featured by one stage. In other words,the accuracy of measurement is higher than the traditional ones,which enjoys a good reference for the similar fields concerning two or more stages of DEA measurement and evaluation. Finally,some constructive suggestions are proposed to improve UEWP and sustainable urban development and ecological civilization construction,for example,the cities with a low efficiency shall accelerate the transformation of industrial structure,develop green and ecological industry,promote the coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration efficiently and construct low-carbon compact city modern city featured by Transit-Oriented-Development( TOD).
How to sustain a high level of well-being with the ecological limits for urban inhabitants,in other words,to improve urban ecological well-being performance( hereinafter refers to UEWP),is the basic requirement and inevitable choice of urban ecological civilization construction and sustainable development. Firstly,this paper establishes the evaluation index system of UEWP based on the DEA method from the perspective of ecological well-being. Then,the UEWP of China 's 35 major cities during 2011-2015 is measured by using two-stage super-efficiency network SBM model with the consideration of undesirable outputs and DEA window analysis method,in which the‘black box'is opened by dividing UEWP into ecological efficiency and economic well-being efficiency from a two-stage angle. Last,the direction for improvement of the inefficient cities is pointed out in terms of slacks analysis. The research shows that: ①During the Twelve Five Year Plan period,the overall efficiency of 35 major cities in China was at a low level with average efficiency of 0. 813,which failed in standing on the DEA efficient frontier. ② From the two-stage perspective,the economic well-being efficiency in the second stage is much bigger than the ecological efficiency in the first stage,and the ecological efficiency with a relatively lower level mainly contributes to a relatively low UEWP in the whole period. ③As for three regions in terms of UEWP,the middle area ranks first,the eastern area ranks the second and the western area ranks the last. ④ Comparatively speaking,the DEA efficiency measured by two-stage super-efficiency network SBM model with the consideration of undesirable outputs is relatively lower than that measured by traditional SBM model featured by one stage. In other words,the accuracy of measurement is higher than the traditional ones,which enjoys a good reference for the similar fields concerning two or more stages of DEA measurement and evaluation. Finally,some constructive suggestions are proposed to improve UEWP and sustainable urban development and ecological civilization construction,for example,the cities with a low efficiency shall accelerate the transformation of industrial structure,develop green and ecological industry,promote the coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration efficiently and construct low-carbon compact city modern city featured by Transit-Oriented-Development( TOD).
引文
[1]诸大建,何芳,霍佳震.中国城市可持续发展绿皮书[M].上海:同济大学出版社,2014.
[2]中华人民共和国2017年国民经济和社会发展统计公报[J].中国统计,2018(3):7-20.
[3]胡鞍钢. 2030中国迈向共同富裕[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[4]BRUNTLAND G. Our common future:the world commission on environment and development[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1987.
[5]诸大建.生态经济学:可持续发展的经济学和管理学[J].中国科学院院刊,2008(6):520-530.
[6]中国国际经济交流中心,哥伦比亚大学地球研究院.中国可持续发展评价指标体系研究——省级与大中城市可持续发展排名(2017年度)[R/OL].(2017-12-19)[2018-09-20].http://www. chinadevelopmentbrief. org. cn/news-20838. html.
[7]城市中国计划.城市可持续发展指数2016[R]. 2017.
[8]智颖飙,王再岚,马中,等.宁夏资源环境绩效及其变动态势[J].生态学报,2009,29(12):6490-6498.
[9]侯孟阳,姚顺波.中国城市生态效率测定及其时空动态演变[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(3):13-21.
[10]诸大建,孟维华,徐萍. 1980—2005年中国经济增长对福利的贡献[C]//2008年度上海市社会科学界第六届学术年会文集,2008.
[11]诸大建,张帅.生态福利绩效及其与经济增长的关系研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(9):59-67.
[12]龙亮军,王霞.上海市生态福利绩效评价研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(2):84-92.
[13]龙亮军,王霞,郭兵.基于改进DEA模型的城市生态福利绩效评价研究——以我国35个大中城市为例[J].自然资源学报,2017,32(4):595-605.
[14]CHARNES A, COOPER W W, RHODES E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making Units[J]. European journal of operational research,1978,2(6):429-444.
[15]TONE K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J]. European journal of operational research,2001,130(3):498-509.
[16]张浩,杨慧敏.基于考虑非期望产出的超效率网络SBM模型的我国商业银行效率[J].系统工程,2017,35(4):17-24.
[17]TONE K,TSUTSUI M. Dynamic DEA:a slacks-based measure approach[J]. Omega,2010,38(3-4):145-156.
[18]江涛,范流通,景鹏.两阶段视角下中国寿险公司经营效率评价与改进——基于网络SBM模型与DEA窗口分析法[J].保险研究,2015(10):33-43.
[19]CHARNES A, CLARK C T, COOPER W W, et al. A developmental study of data envelopment analysis in measuring the efficiency of maintenance units in the US air forces[J]. Annals of operations research,1984,2(1):95-112.
[20]CULLINANE K,SONG D W,JI P,et al. An application of DEA windows analysis to container port production efficiency[J]. Review of network economics,2004,3(2). DOI:https://doi. org/10.2202/1446-9022. 1050.
[21]陈浩,王晓红,张宝生.基于视窗分析模型的我国高校科研效率评价[J].科研管理,2013,34(7):101-111.
[22]诸大建,邱寿丰.生态效率是循环经济的合适测度[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2006,16(5):1-6.
[23]付丽娜,陈晓红,冷智花.基于超效率DEA模型的城市群生态效率研究——以长株潭“3+5”城市群为例[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013,23(4):169-175.
[24]成金华,孙琼,郭明晶,等.中国生态效率的区域差异及动态演化研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(1):47-54.
[25]ZHANG S,ZHU D J,SHI Q H,et al. Which countries are more ecologically efficient in improving human well-being? an application of the Index of Ecological Well-being Performance[J]. Resources,conservation and recycling,2018,129(1):112-119.
[26]ZHANG S,SHI Q H,CHENG M W. Renewable natural capital,the biocapacity,and subjective well-being[J]. Journal of cleaner production,2017,150:277-286.
[27]龙亮军,王霞,郭兵.生态福利绩效视角下的上海市可持续发展评价研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2016,25(1):9-15.
[2]中华人民共和国2017年国民经济和社会发展统计公报[J].中国统计,2018(3):7-20.
[3]胡鞍钢. 2030中国迈向共同富裕[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011.
[4]BRUNTLAND G. Our common future:the world commission on environment and development[M]. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1987.
[5]诸大建.生态经济学:可持续发展的经济学和管理学[J].中国科学院院刊,2008(6):520-530.
[6]中国国际经济交流中心,哥伦比亚大学地球研究院.中国可持续发展评价指标体系研究——省级与大中城市可持续发展排名(2017年度)[R/OL].(2017-12-19)[2018-09-20].http://www. chinadevelopmentbrief. org. cn/news-20838. html.
[7]城市中国计划.城市可持续发展指数2016[R]. 2017.
[8]智颖飙,王再岚,马中,等.宁夏资源环境绩效及其变动态势[J].生态学报,2009,29(12):6490-6498.
[9]侯孟阳,姚顺波.中国城市生态效率测定及其时空动态演变[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(3):13-21.
[10]诸大建,孟维华,徐萍. 1980—2005年中国经济增长对福利的贡献[C]//2008年度上海市社会科学界第六届学术年会文集,2008.
[11]诸大建,张帅.生态福利绩效及其与经济增长的关系研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(9):59-67.
[12]龙亮军,王霞.上海市生态福利绩效评价研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(2):84-92.
[13]龙亮军,王霞,郭兵.基于改进DEA模型的城市生态福利绩效评价研究——以我国35个大中城市为例[J].自然资源学报,2017,32(4):595-605.
[14]CHARNES A, COOPER W W, RHODES E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making Units[J]. European journal of operational research,1978,2(6):429-444.
[15]TONE K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J]. European journal of operational research,2001,130(3):498-509.
[16]张浩,杨慧敏.基于考虑非期望产出的超效率网络SBM模型的我国商业银行效率[J].系统工程,2017,35(4):17-24.
[17]TONE K,TSUTSUI M. Dynamic DEA:a slacks-based measure approach[J]. Omega,2010,38(3-4):145-156.
[18]江涛,范流通,景鹏.两阶段视角下中国寿险公司经营效率评价与改进——基于网络SBM模型与DEA窗口分析法[J].保险研究,2015(10):33-43.
[19]CHARNES A, CLARK C T, COOPER W W, et al. A developmental study of data envelopment analysis in measuring the efficiency of maintenance units in the US air forces[J]. Annals of operations research,1984,2(1):95-112.
[20]CULLINANE K,SONG D W,JI P,et al. An application of DEA windows analysis to container port production efficiency[J]. Review of network economics,2004,3(2). DOI:https://doi. org/10.2202/1446-9022. 1050.
[21]陈浩,王晓红,张宝生.基于视窗分析模型的我国高校科研效率评价[J].科研管理,2013,34(7):101-111.
[22]诸大建,邱寿丰.生态效率是循环经济的合适测度[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2006,16(5):1-6.
[23]付丽娜,陈晓红,冷智花.基于超效率DEA模型的城市群生态效率研究——以长株潭“3+5”城市群为例[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013,23(4):169-175.
[24]成金华,孙琼,郭明晶,等.中国生态效率的区域差异及动态演化研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(1):47-54.
[25]ZHANG S,ZHU D J,SHI Q H,et al. Which countries are more ecologically efficient in improving human well-being? an application of the Index of Ecological Well-being Performance[J]. Resources,conservation and recycling,2018,129(1):112-119.
[26]ZHANG S,SHI Q H,CHENG M W. Renewable natural capital,the biocapacity,and subjective well-being[J]. Journal of cleaner production,2017,150:277-286.
[27]龙亮军,王霞,郭兵.生态福利绩效视角下的上海市可持续发展评价研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2016,25(1):9-15.