资源科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (9): 1619-1629.doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.09.04

• 碳排放与能源 • 上一篇    下一篇

京津冀区域内增加值贸易的经济收益和隐含碳排放比较

李艳梅1,2,牛苗苗1,2,张红丽3,4()   

  1. 1. 北京工业大学经济与管理学院 北京 100124
    2. 北京工业大学北京城市副中心研究院,北京 100124
    3. 中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所,北京100101
    4. 中国科学院大学,北京100049
  • 收稿日期:2019-01-02 修回日期:2019-05-05 出版日期:2019-09-25 发布日期:2019-09-25
  • 通讯作者: 张红丽
  • 作者简介:李艳梅,女,内蒙古人,研究员,博士,研究方向为能源经济和低碳经济。E-mail:liyanmei@bjut.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(41871201);北京市自然科学基金项目(9172001)

Comparison of economic benefits and embodied carbon emissions of intraregional value-added trade in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region

LI Yanmei1,2,NIU Miaomiao1,2,ZHANG Hongli3,4()   

  1. 1. College of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China
    2. Beijing City Sub-Center Institute, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China
    3. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    4. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • Received:2019-01-02 Revised:2019-05-05 Online:2019-09-25 Published:2019-09-25
  • Contact: ZHANG Hongli

摘要:

价值链分工使得一种产品的生产分割在不同地区,从而获得的收益和隐含的碳排放也产生在不同地区。考察京津冀区域内贸易获得的经济收益和产生的碳排放代价问题,对制定公平有效的区域协同碳减排方案具有重要意义。价值链分工背景下,增加值贸易核算体系可以更加准确地测算贸易收益和隐含碳排放。借鉴此核算体系,本文运用多区域投入产出分析方法和结构分解分析模型,对京津冀区域内贸易的经济收益及隐含碳排放进行测算,并对其差异进行比较。结果表明:①总量方面,北京从区域内贸易中获得的经济收益最高,天津次之,河北最少;而隐含碳排放量的排序与之相反:河北最高,天津次之,北京最少;②行业分布上,北京从区域内贸易中获得的经济收益高度集中于服务业部门,而天津和河北却分散分布于多个部门;各地的隐含CO2排放均集中于中间品贸易部分,占比最高的是能源工业部门;③京津冀从贸易中获得的经济收益和碳排放存在差异的原因主要在于完全CO2排放强度、调出规模和调出结构的不同。因此京津冀区域在一体化发展过程中要加强协同合作,共同制定碳减排目标和承担碳减排责任,并且各地要根据发展阶段和特点寻求最佳合作模式。

关键词: 京津冀区域, 增加值贸易, 经济收益, 碳排放, 多区域投入产出

Abstract:

Under the background of value chain division of labor, value-added trade accounting system can more accurately measure trade gains and embodied carbon emissions. Referring to this accounting system, this study used a multiregional input-output analysis method and a structural decomposition analysis model to calculate the economic benefits and implied carbon emissions of intraregional trade in Beijing Municipality, Tianjin Municipality, and Hebei Province, and compared their differences. The results show that: (1) The economic benefits obtained from intraregional trade are highest in Beijing, followed by Tianjin, and then Hebei, while the order of implied carbon emissions is the opposite; (2) Economic benefits of Beijing are highly concentrated in the services sector, while that of Tianjin and Hebei are in different sectors. Embodied CO2 emissions are concentrated in the middle trade sector, with the highest proportion in the energy sector; (3) The differences in economic benefits and carbon emissions obtained from trade between Beijing, Tianjin, and Hebei are mainly due to the intensity of complete CO2 emissions, trade scale, and trade structure. Therefore, in the process of integrated development, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region should strengthen coordination and cooperation, jointly formulate carbon emission reduction targets, and assume responsibility for carbon emission reduction, and all regions should seek the best cooperation mode according to the development stage and characteristics.

Key words: Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, value-added trade, economic benefits, carbon emissions, multiregional input and output