命令控制型和市场激励型环境规制对造林面积的影响——来自中国县级层面的准自然实验证据

doi:10.18402/resci.2021.10.08

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

命令控制型和市场激励型环境规制,孰能更有效地提升造林面积从而更好地保护森林生态环境一直存在争议。本文利用国家重点生态功能区政策这一命令控制型环境规制,和生态转移支付政策这一市场激励型环境规制作为准自然实验,基于2006—2016年1372个县级数据,采用双重差分法识别了这两类环境规制对造林面积影响的因果效应及政策相对有效性。研究结论如下：①与命令控制型环境规制相比,市场激励型环境规制对造林面积的影响更为显著且具有长期效果。表现为国家重点生态功能区政策使造林面积提升了6.7%,但该效应随着时间推移呈现出下降的趋势;生态转移支付政策使造林面积提升了8.2%,且该效应随着时间推移逐步增强。②异质性分析发现,初始造林面积较高和经济发展水平较高的县表现出更高的造林面积提升效应。③进一步的成本收益估算表明,国家重点生态功能区和生态转移支付政策通过提高造林面积带来的环境健康效应分别为5926.11亿元和7256.14亿元,是其减少财政收入所产生的经济成本的2.19和1.92倍。本文结论有助于我国制定长期有效的森林环境规制政策。

关键词: 造林面积, 命令控制型环境规制, 市场激励型环境规制, 国家重点生态功能区, 生态转移支付, 双重差分法, 准自然实验

Abstract:

There has been controversy over the relative effectiveness of heterogeneous environmental regulations—command-and-control environmental regulations and market-based environmental regulations—on afforestation area improvement. Employing the difference-in-differences method, this study took advantage of two Chinese policies—the National Key Ecological Functional Areas Policy (NKEFAP), which can be regarded as a command-and-control regulation, and the Ecological Transfer Payment Policy (ETPP), which can be viewed as a market-based regulation—as quasi-natural experiments to delve into the treatment effects of these two types of environmental regulations on afforestation area improvement. We collected data from 1372 counties in China during 2006-2016. The results show that: (1) Both the NKEFAP and ETPP can improve the afforestation area, but the effect of the ETPP was higher than the NKEFAP. Specifically, the NKEFAP increased afforestation areaby 6.7%, while the ETPP increased afforestation area by 8.2% and the effect increased over time. (2) The heterogeneity analyses found that the impact of the NKEFAP and ETPP on afforestation area was greater for counties with better initial afforestation area and high economic development levels. (3) Further cost-benefit analysis indicates that the total health benefit from reduced mortality due to NKEFAP and ETPP was RMB 592.611 billion and 725.614 billion yuan, respectively, which is 2.19 and 1.92 times the cost of reducing fiscal revenue. The conclusions of this study can contribute to the formulation of long-term effective forest environmental regulation policies in China.

Key words: afforestation area, command-and-control environmental regulation, market-based environmental regulation, National Key Ecological Functional Areas, Ecological Transfer Payment, difference-in-differences method, quasi-natural experiment

潘丹. 命令控制型和市场激励型环境规制对造林面积的影响——来自中国县级层面的准自然实验证据[J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(10): 2026-2041.

PAN Dan. The impact of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulations on afforestation area: Quasi-natural experimental evidence from county data in China[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(10): 2026-2041.

图/表 13

图1

图2

图3

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

图4

表7

表8

表9

参考文献 41

[1]	孙婉馨, 张黎, 任小丽, 等. 1998-2017年中国典型森林生态系统潜在蒸散的变化趋势及成因[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(5):920-932.
	[ Sun W X, Zhang L, Ren X L, et al. Trends and influencing factors of potential evapotranspiration in typical forest ecosystems of China during 1998-2017[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(5):920-932.]
[2]	Li W H. Degradation and restoration of forest ecosystems in China[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2004, 201(1):33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.06.010
[3]	纪鹰翔. 我国林业政策变化对森林资源产生作用的研究[J]. 中国林业经济, 2018, (6):66-67.
	[ Ji Y X. Study on the impact of China’s forestry policy changes on forest resources[J]. China Forestry Economics, 2018, (6):66-67.]
[4]	潘丹, 陈寰, 孔凡斌. 1949年以来中国林业政策的演进特征及其规律研究: 基于283个涉林规范性文件文本的量化分析[J]. 中国农村经济, 2019, (7):89-108.
	[ Pan D, Chen H, Kong F B. The evolution of forestry policies since 1949: An quantitative analysis based on 283 texts of forest-related normative policy documents[J]. Chinese Rural Economy, 2019, (7):89-108.]
[5]	张宁, 张维洁. 中国用能权交易可以获得经济红利与节能减排的双赢吗?[J]. 经济研究, 2019, 54(1):165-181.
	[ Zhang N, Zhang W J. Can energy quota trading achieve win-win development for economic growth and energy savings in China?[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2019, 54(1):165-181.]
[6]	Blackman A, Li Z Y, Liu A T. Efficacy of command-and-control and market-based environmental regulation in developing countries[J]. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 2018, 10(1):381-404. doi: 10.1146/resource.2018.10.issue-1
[7]	祁毓, 陈怡心, 李万新. 生态转移支付理论研究进展及国内外实践模式[J]. 国外社会科学, 2017, (5):45-54.
	[ Qi Y, Chen Y X, Li W X. Research progress in Ecological Transfer Payment Theory and its practice model[J]. Social Sciences Abroad, 2017, (5):45-54.]
[8]	卢洪友, 祁毓. 生态功能区转移支付制度与激励约束机制重构[J]. 环境保护, 2014, 42(12):34-36.
	[ Lu H Y, Qi Y. Transfer payment system of ecological function areas and incentive & constraints mechanism refactoring[J]. Environmental Protection, 2014, 42(12):34-36.]
[9]	伏润民, 缪小林. 中国生态功能区财政转移支付制度体系重构: 基于拓展的能值模型衡量的生态外溢价值[J]. 经济研究, 2015, 50(3):47-61.
	[ Fu R M, Miao X L. A new financial transfer payment system in ecological function areas in China: Based on the spillover ecological value measured by the expansion emergy analysis[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2015, 50(3):47-61.]
[10]	徐洁, 谢高地, 肖玉, 等. 国家重点生态功能区生态环境质量变化动态分析[J]. 生态学报, 2019, 39(9):3039-3050.
	[ Xu J, Xie G D, Xiao Y, et al. Dynamic analysis of ecological environmental quality changes in national key ecological function areas in China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(9):3039-3050.]
[11]	李国平, 刘倩, 张文彬. 国家重点生态功能区转移支付与县域生态环境质量: 基于陕西省县级数据的实证研究[J]. 西安交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2014, 34(2):27-31.
	[ Li G P, Liu Q, Zhang W B. Transfer payment system in the national key ecological function area and the ecological environmental quality: Empirical study based on the countryside data of Shaanxi Province[J]. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University (Social Sciences), 2014, 34(2):27-31.]
[12]	徐鸿翔, 张文彬. 国家重点生态功能区转移支付的生态保护效应研究: 基于陕西省数据的实证研究[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2017, 27(11):141-148.
	[ Xu H X, Zhang W B. Study on the ecological protection effect of the transfer payment of national key ecological function areas: An empirical study based on Shaanxi data[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2017, 27(11):141-148.]
[13]	朱艳, 陈红华. 重点生态功能区转移支付改善生态环境了吗? 基于PSM的结果[J]. 南方经济, 2020, (10):125-140.
	[ Zhu Y, Chen H H. Did the transfer payment in key eco-functional areas improve the eco-environment? Based on PSM[J]. South China Journal of Economics, 2020, (10):125-140.]
[14]	燕守广, 李辉, 李海东, 等. 基于土地利用与景观格局的生态保护红线生态系统健康评价方法: 以南京市为例[J]. 自然资源学报, 2020, 35(5):1109-1118.
	[ Yan S G, Li H, Li H D, et al. Ecosystem health assessment method of eco-redline based on land use and landscape pattern in Nanjing[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2020, 35(5):1109-1118.]
[15]	邓伟, 周渝, 张勇, 等. 重庆市生态保护红线区生态系统服务价值时空演变特征及其驱动[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2020, 29(1):79-89.
	[ Deng W, Zhou Y, Zhang Y, et al. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of ecosystem service value in Chongqing ecological red line area[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2020, 29(1):79-89.]
[16]	陈海嵩. “生态红线”制度体系建设的路线图[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2015, 25(9):52-59.
	[ Chen H S. Road map of institutional system for “eco-redline”[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2015, 25(9):52-59.]
[17]	吕洁华, 孙喆, 张滨. 森林管护对森林生态安全的响应成效与影响路径分析[J]. 林业经济问题, 2019, 39(4):355-362.
	[ Lv J H, Sun Z, Zhang B. Analysis on the response effectiveness and influence path of forest management and protection to forest ecological security[J]. Issues of Forestry Economics, 2019, 39(4):355-362.]
[18]	徐文茹, 贺红士, 罗旭, 等. 停止商业性采伐对大兴安岭森林结构与地上生物量的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(4):1203-1215.
	[ Xu W R, He H S, Luo X, et al. Long-term effects of commercial harvest exclusion on forest structure and aboveground biomass in the Great Xing’an Mountains, China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(4):1203-1215.]
[19]	王华丽, 张宇. 生态补偿视角下政策性森林保险的实施效果评价[J]. 林业经济, 2019, 41(4):105-109.
	[ Wang H L, Zhang Y. The effect evaluation on policy-related forest insurance under the ecological compensation perspective[J]. Forestry Economics, 2019, 41(4):105-109.]
[20]	周婷, 张勇, 严力蛟. 生态公益林补偿政策对植被覆盖时空格局的影响: 以杭州市临安区为例[J]. 生态学报, 2018, 38(13):4800-4808.
	[ Zhou T, Zhang Y, Yan L J. Effects of forest compensation policy for public welfare on the spatiotemporal patterns and dynamics of vegetation cover: A case study at Lin’an, Hangzhou City[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2018, 38(13):4800-4808.]
[21]	朱洪革, 付玉竹, 张少鹏. 天保工程转移支付的森林生态效益及其影响机制[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(8):2663-2670.
	[ Zhu H G, Fu Y Z, Zhang S P. Ecological benefits of transfer payment of natural forest protection projects and their impact mechanisms[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(8):2663-2670.]
[22]	Ouyang Z Y, Zheng H, Xiao Y, et al. Improvements in ecosystem services from investments in natural capital[J]. Science, 2016, 352(6292):1455-1459. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf2295
[23]	Bryan B A, Gao L, Ye Y Q, et al. China’s response to a national land-system sustainability emergency[J]. Nature, 2018, 559(7713):193-204. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0280-2
[24]	李凌超, 刘金龙, 程宝栋, 等. 中国劳动力转移对森林转型的影响[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(8):1526-1538.
	[ Li L C, Liu J L, Cheng B D, et al. Influence of labor transfer on China’s forest transition[J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(8):1526-1538.]
[25]	赵佳程, 张沛, Max K, 等. 森林治理中以行动者为中心的权力理论[J]. 资源科学, 2020, 42(4):636-648.
	[ Zhao J C, Zhang P, Max K, et al. Actor-centred power theory in forest governance[J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(4):636-648.]
[26]	何文剑, 王于洋, 江民星. 集体林产权改革与森林资源变化研究综述[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(11):2083-2093.
	[ He W J, Wang Y Y, Jiang M X. A review on the collective forestland tenure reform and changes in forest resources[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(11):2083-2093.]
[27]	屈小娥. 异质型环境规制影响雾霾污染的双重效应[J]. 当代经济科学, 2018, 40(6):26-37.
	[ Qu X E. Double effects of heterogeneous environmental regulation on haze pollution[J]. Modern Economic Science, 2018, 40(6):26-37.]
[28]	She Y, Liu Y B, Jiang L, et al. Is China’s River Chief Policy effective? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 220:919-930. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.031
[29]	李泽红, 柏永青, 孙九林, 等. 西部生态脆弱贫困区生态文明建设战略研究[J]. 中国工程科学, 2019, 21(5):80-86.
	[ Li Z H, Bai Y Q, Sun J L, et al. Ecological civilization construction in ecologically fragile poverty-stricken areas in western China[J]. Strategic Study of CAE, 2019, 21(5):80-86.]
[30]	杨万平, 赵金凯. 政府环境信息公开有助于生态环境质量改善吗?[J]. 经济管理, 2018, 40(8):5-22.
	[ Yang W P, Zhao J K. Is government environmental information disclosure conducive to improvement of ecological environment quality?[J]. Business Management Journal, 2018, 40(8):5-22.]
[31]	Feng G F, Dong M Y, Wen J, et al. The impacts of environmental governance on political turnover of municipal party secretary in China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2018, 25(25):24668-24681. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-2499-8
[32]	周茂, 陆毅, 杜艳, 等. 开发区设立与地区制造业升级[J]. 中国工业经济, 2018, (3):62-79.
	[ Zhou M, Lu Y, Du Y, et al. Special economic zones and region manufacturing upgrading[J]. China Industrial Economics, 2018, (3):62-79.]
[33]	Li P, Lu Y, Wang J. Does flattening government improve economic performance? Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2016, 123:18-37. doi: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2016.07.002
[34]	祁毓, 陈建伟, 李万新, 等. 生态环境治理、经济发展与公共服务供给: 来自国家重点生态功能区及其转移支付的准实验证据[J]. 管理世界, 2019, 35(1):115-134.
	[ Qi Y, Chen J W, Li W X, et al. Ecological environment management, economic development and public service supply: Quasi experimental evidence from the national key ecological functional areas and their transfer payments[J]. Management World, 2019, 35(1):115-134.]
[35]	He G J, Liu T, Zhou M G. Straw burning, PM2.5, and death: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jdeveco.2020.102468.
[36]	涂正革, 邓辉, 谌仁俊, 等. 中央环保督察的环境经济效益: 来自河北省试点的证据[J]. 经济评论, 2020, 221(1):3-16.
	[ Tu Z G, Deng H, Chen R J, et al. The environmental and economic benefits of the central environmental protection supervision: Evidence from policy pilot in Hebei[J]. Economic Review, 2020, 221(1):3-16.]
[37]	张灵婕, 尤添革, 林柳璇, 等. 福建省空气质量与森林覆盖率的关系研究[J]. 武夷科学, 2018, 34(1):144-150.
	[ Zhang L J, You T G, Lin L X, et al. Research on the relationship between air quality and forest coverage in Fujian[J]. Wuyi Science Journal, 2018, 34(1):144-150.]
[38]	Jim C Y, Chen W Y. Ecosystem services and valuation of urban forests in China[J]. Cities, 2009, 26(4):187-194. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2009.03.003
[39]	周海川. 空气质量与公共健康: 以森林吸收烟粉尘为例[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(8):120-131.
	[ Zhou H C. Air pollution and public health: Evidence from forests absorb smoke and dust emission in China[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2017, 53(8):120-131.]
[40]	阿子雅, 韩柱. 空气污染的健康效应及经济损失研究: 以2014年亚太经济合作组织会议期间为例[J]. 内蒙古民族大学学报(社会科学版), 2019, 45(2):117-124.
	[ A Z Y, Han Z. The health effects and economic losses of air pollution: Evidence from the period of 2014 Beijing APEC-Meeting[J]. Journal of Inner Mongolia University for the Nationalities (Social Sciences), 2019, 45(2):117-124.]
[41]	Miller T R. Variations between countries in values of statistical life[J]. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 2000, 34(2):169-188.

	造林面积
	（1）	（2）
国家重点生态功能区政策	0.067**(0.031)
生态转移支付政策		0.082**(0.041)
年降水量	-0.000(0.001)	-0.002(0.004)
年均气温	0.000(0.000)	0.000(0.000)
人均GDP	0.010*(0.005)	0.006**(0.003)
人口密度	-7.039***(2.117)	-6.258***(2.091)
耕地面积	-3.745**(1.943)	-2.286**(1.227)
时间效应	控制	控制
地区效应	控制	控制
R²	0.233	0.154
观测值	12607	13476

	造林面积
	（1）	（2）
国家重点生态功能区政策	0.067**(0.031)
生态转移支付政策		0.082**(0.041)
实施政策后1年	0.062***(0.023)	0.084**(0.033)
实施政策后2年	0.037**(0.016)	0.085**(0.035)
实施政策后3年	0.049(0.033)	0.089*(0.051)
实施政策后4年	0.041(0.035)	0.096***(0.034)
实施政策后5年	0.047(0.035)	0.101**(0.058)
控制变量	控制	控制
时间效应	控制	控制
地区效应	控制	控制
R²	0.142	0.154
观测值	12607	13476

	初始造林面积较高组		初始造林面积较低组
	（1）	（2）	（3）	（4）
国家重点生态功能区政策	0.081***(0.029)		0.012(0.032)
生态转移支付政策		0.097***(0.041)		0.024(0.028)
控制变量	控制	控制	控制	控制
固定效应	控制	控制	控制	控制

	经济发展水平较高组		经济发展水平较低组
	（1）	（2）	（3）	（4）
国家重点生态功能区政策	0.079**(0.028)		0.036(0.078)
生态转移支付政策		0.096*(0.043)		0.054(0.031)
控制变量	控制	控制	控制	控制
固定效应	控制	控制	控制	控制

	造林面积
国家重点生态功能区政策	0.067**(0.031)
生态转移支付政策		0.082**(0.041)
实施政策前1年	0.021(0.066)	0.049(0.078)
实施政策前2年	0.195(0.054)	0.086(0.073)
实施政策前3年	0.249(0.217)	0.179(0.394)
实施政策前4年	0.437(0.558)	0.382(0.515)
控制变量	控制	控制
时间效应	控制	控制
地区效应	控制	控制
R²	0.219	0.187
观测值	12607	13476