Resources Science ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (11): 2277-2288.doi: 10.18402/resci.2021.11.11
Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2021-03-12
Revised:
2021-08-29
Online:
2021-11-25
Published:
2022-01-27
MA Junqi, YUE Zhang. Effects of ecological compensation on water environment governance in the Yellow River Basin: A test based on difference-in-difference method[J].Resources Science, 2021, 43(11): 2277-2288.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks
Table 1
Variable definitions and descriptive statistics
变量 | 变量定义与单位 | 样本数 | 均值 | 标准差 | 最小值 | 最大值 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
被解释变量 | ||||||
氨氮 | 城市监测点氨氮浓度/(mg/L) | 9957 | 1.234 | 3.286 | 0.01 | 60.7 |
化学需氧量 | 城市监测点化学需氧量/(mg/L) | 9957 | 5.896 | 10.366 | 0.1 | 241 |
解释变量 | ||||||
生态补偿政策 | 流域内城市是否推行了生态补偿政策,推行=1,未推行=0 | 9957 | 0.313 | 0.464 | 0 | 1 |
控制变量 | ||||||
上游水质 | 上游城市氨氮年均值/(mg/L) | 9731 | 1.426 | 0.4768 | 0.603 | 2.145 |
经济发展水平 | 人均GDP/万元,取对数 | 9957 | 16.372 | 12.828 | 13.70 | 18.179 |
人口密度 | 城市总人口/城市区域面积/(人/km2) | 9957 | 504.361 | 289.098 | 63.03 | 1052.58 |
工业化水平 | 规模以上工业总产值/万元,取对数 | 9957 | 16.700 | 0.959 | 13.551 | 18.500 |
产业结构 | 第二产业产值占GDP比重/% | 9957 | 47.713 | 7.623 | 28.61 | 73.45 |
外商直接投资 | 外商直接投资额/万美元,取对数 | 9957 | 9.661 | 1.395 | 5.298 | 12.503 |
科技投入 | 科技支出占公共财政支出比重 | 9957 | 0.621 | 0.157 | 0.167 | 0.897 |
中介变量 | ||||||
环境治理投资 | 污水处理投资额/万元 | 9957 | 7671.53 | 12948.7 | 52 | 94430 |
污水排放量 | 工业废水排放量/万t,取对数 | 9957 | 8.376 | 0.864 | 4.875 | 9.946 |
Table 2
Benchmark regression results
氨氮 | 化学需氧量 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | ||
生态补偿政策 | -0.620*** | -0.544*** | -0.594*** | -3.112*** | -3.117*** | -3.157*** | |
(0.075) | (0.076) | (0.075) | (0.258) | (0.258) | (0.259) | ||
上游水质 | 0.017*** | 1.001*** | 1.003*** | 1.729*** | 30.04*** | 30.08*** | |
(0.0045) | (0.0827) | (0.0807) | (0.279) | (0.931) | (0.932) | ||
经济发展水平 | -0.173** | -0.329*** | -0.241*** | -1.029*** | -1.022*** | -1.224*** | |
(0.087) | (0.0801) | (0.0799) | (0.270) | (0.271) | (0.277) | ||
人口密度 | 0.000 | -0.004*** | -0.005*** | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.0009 | |
(0.001) | (0.001) | (0.001) | (0.004) | (0.004) | (0.004) | ||
工业化水平 | 0.116* | -0.234*** | -0.275*** | -0.211 | -0.213 | -0.137 | |
(0.069) | (0.057) | (0.056) | (0.194) | (0.194) | (0.194) | ||
产业结构 | 0.006 | 0.043*** | 0.0499*** | 0.271*** | 0.270*** | 0.275*** | |
(0.004) | (0.006) | (0.007) | (0.022) | (0.022) | (0.023) | ||
外商直接投资 | -0.229*** | 0.320*** | 0.302*** | 1.356*** | 1.351*** | 1.340*** | |
(0.031) | (0.031) | (0.030) | (0.104) | (0.104) | (0.104) | ||
科技投入 | -71.38*** | 2.129 | 5.642 | -19.43 | -19.07 | -20.56 | |
(9.471) | (10.83) | (10.57) | (36.54) | (36.61) | (36.60) | ||
控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
地区固定效应 | 不控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 不控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
时间固定效应 | 不控制 | 不控制 | 控制 | 不控制 | 不控制 | 控制 | |
观测值 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | |
R2 | 0.043 | 0.563 | 0.587 | 0.525 | 0.498 | 0.502 |
Table 3
Mechanism analysis results
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
投入效应 | 减排效应 | 氨氮 | 氨氮 | 化学需氧量 | 化学需氧量 | |
生态补偿政策 | 0.251*** | -0.059*** | -0.578*** | -0.604*** | -3.093*** | -3.133*** |
(0.033) | (0.015) | (0.075) | (0.074) | (0.260) | (0.259) | |
投入效应 | -0.092*** | -0.255*** | ||||
(0.022) | (0.077) | |||||
减排效应 | -0.053** | 0.396** | ||||
(0.048) | (0.168) | |||||
控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 |
地区固定效应 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 |
时间固定效应 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 |
观测值 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 | 9957 |
R2 | 0.389 | 0.742 | 0.586 | 0.586 | 0.587 | 0.501 |
Table 5
Analysis of heterogeneity
氨氮 | 化学需氧量 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
上游 | 中游 | 下游 | 上游 | 中游 | 下游 | ||
(1) | (2) | (3) | (1) | (2) | (3) | ||
生态补偿政策 | -0.015 | -2.895 | -0.631*** | -0.360 | -3.680 | -13.680** | |
(0.038) | (0.490) | (0.057) | (0.090) | (1.767) | (0.111) | ||
控制变量 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
地区固定效应 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
时间固定效应 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | 控制 | |
观测值 | 2717 | 1335 | 5905 | 2717 | 1335 | 5905 | |
R2 | 0.604 | 0.692 | 0.390 | 0.270 | 0.671 | 0.494 |
[1] | 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.] | |
[2] |
Wunder S. Revisiting the Concept of Payments for Environmental Services[J]. Ecological Economics, 2015, 117:234-243.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.08.016 |
[3] |
Muradian R, Corbera E, Pascual U, et al. Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services[J]. Ecological Economics, 2010, 69(6):1202-1208.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.006 |
[4] | Fernandez L. Wastewater pollution abatement across an international border[J]. Environment & Development Economics, 2009, 14(1):67-88. |
[5] |
Cheng Y X, Wu D S, Bian Y. A systematic approach of determining compensation and allocation for river basin water environment based on total pollutants control[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110896.
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110896 |
[6] | 袁巍. 流域生态补偿与黄河流域保护[J]. 环境保护, 2011, (18):27-29. |
[ Yuan W. Watershed ecological compensation and Yellow River Basin protection[J]. Environmental Protection, 2011, (18):27-29.] | |
[7] | 宋丽颖, 杨潭. 转移支付对黄河流域环境治理的效果分析[J]. 经济地理, 2016, 36(9):166-172. |
[ Song L Y, Yang T. Result analysis of transfer payment for environmental governance in Yellow River Basin[J]. Economic Geography, 2016, 36(9):166-172.] | |
[8] |
Yang W, Liu W, Luo J Y, et al. Performance and prospects of payments for ecosystem services programs: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2013, 127:86-95.
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.04.019 pmid: 23685121 |
[9] | 王奕淇, 李国平, 延步青. 流域生态服务价值横向补偿分摊研究[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(6):1013-1023. |
[ Wang Y Q, Li G P, Yan B Q. Sharing of watershed ecosystem service value horizontal compensation burden by downstream cities[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(6):1013-1023.] | |
[10] |
Chen Y P, Fu B J, Zhao Y, et al. Sustainable development in the Yellow River Basin: Issues and strategies[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121223.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121223 |
[11] | 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.] | |
[12] |
Yin X A, Liu Y M, Yang Z F, et al. Eco-compensation standards for sustaining high flow events below hydropower plants[J]. Journal Clean Production, 2018, 182:1-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.204 |
[13] |
Muradinu R, Rival L. Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services Ecosystem services[J]. Ecosystem Services, 2012, 1(1):93-100.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.009 |
[14] | 缪小林, 赵一心. 生态功能区转移支付对生态环境改善的影响: 资金补偿还是制度激励?[J]. 财政研究, 2019, (5):17-32. |
[ Miao X L, Zhao Y X. Impact of transfer payment in eco-functional areas on eco-environmental improvement: Capital compensation or institutional incentives?[J]. Public Finance Research, 2019, (5):17-32.] | |
[15] | 金凤君. 黄河流域生态保护与高质量发展的协调推进策略[J]. 改革, 2019, (11):33-39. |
[ Jin F J. Coordinated promotion strategy of ecological protection and high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin[J]. Reform, 2019, (11):33-39.] | |
[16] |
Zhao M M, Wang S M, Chen Y P, et al. Pollution status of the Yellow River tributaries in middle and lower reaches[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137 861.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137 861 |
[17] | Li A H, Cui S Y, Wang H R, et al. Water storage changes in the middle reaches of the Yellow River Basin based on GRACE time variable gravitation model[J]. Journal of Natural Resources, 2017, 32(3):461-473. |
[18] |
Zhao M M, Chen Y P, Xue L G. Greater health risk in wet season than in dry season in the Yellow River of the Lanzhou region[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 644:873-883.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.006 |
[19] | 温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014, 22(5):731-745. |
[ Wen Z L, Ye B J. Analyses of mediation effects: The development of methods and models[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(5):731-745.] | |
[20] | 沈坤荣, 金刚. 中国地方政府环境治理的政策效应: 基于“河长制”演进的研究[J]. 中国社会科学, 2018, (5):92-115. |
[ Shen K R, Jin G. The policy effects of local governments’ environmental governance in China: A study based on the evolution of the “river-director” system[J]. Social Sciences in China, 2018, (5):92-115.] | |
[21] | 沈坤荣, 周力. 地方政府竞争、垂直型环境规制与污染回流效应[J]. 经济研究, 2020, 55(3):35-49. |
[ Shen K R, Zhou L. Local government competition, vertical environmental regulation and pollution backflow effect[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2020, 55(3):35-49.] | |
[22] |
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 |
[23] | Beck T, Levine R, Levkov A. Big bad banks? The winners and losers from bank deregulation in the United States[J]. The Journal of Finance, 2010, 65(5):1637-1667. |
[24] | La-Ferrara E. Soap operas and fertility: Evidence from Brazil[J]. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2012, 4(4):1-31. |
|