环境规制下外商直接投资对环境质量的影响——基于不同行业组的比较研究
|
摘要
本文利用2001-2016年我国34个工业行业的面板数据,将工业行业分为资本、劳动、能源和技术密集型四类,探究环境规制下FDI对环境质量的影响效应和作用机制在不同行业组的差异和变化。研究发现:FDI对环境质量的影响在不同的行业组呈现不同特点,在资本和劳动密集型行业呈"正U型"关系,在技术密集型行业呈"倒U型"关系,对能源密集型行业的影响不显著;环境规制使得FDI改变了其对环境质量影响路径的作用大小和方向,并总体上改变了FDI对环境质量的影响:导致资本密集型行业FDI对环境质量的影响由改善作用转化为恶化作用,促使能源密集型行业FDI对环境质量的影响由不显著转化为改善作用,弱化了劳动密集型行业FDI对环境质量的改善作用,削弱了技术密集型行业FDI对环境质量的恶化作用。因此,应根据行业特点设置环境规制强度,促进FDI对环境质量的改善。
This paper collects panel data of 34 industrial industries in China from 2001 to 2016 and divides all industries into four groups of capital-intensive,labor-intensive,energy-intensive and technology-intensive,to explore the differences and changes of FDI's impact and mechanism on environmental quality in different industry groups under environmental regulations. This study finds that,FDI has different characteristics on environmental quality in different industry groups: it shows a"positive U-shaped"relationship in industrial groups of capital-intensive and labor-intensive,while shows a"negative U-shaped"relationship in technology-intensive group,and has no significant impact on energy-intensive group; environmental regulation makes FDI change the size and direction of its impact path on environmental quality,and generally changes the impact of FDI on environmental quality: it leads to FDI's impact on environmental quality in capital-intensive group changes from improving to deteriorating,leads to the impact in energy-intensive group changes from non-significant to improving,weakens the improving impact in labor-intensive group and deteriorating impact in technology-intensive group. Therefore,the intensity of environmental regulation should be set according to the characteristics of the industry to promote the improvement of FDI's environmental quality.
This paper collects panel data of 34 industrial industries in China from 2001 to 2016 and divides all industries into four groups of capital-intensive,labor-intensive,energy-intensive and technology-intensive,to explore the differences and changes of FDI's impact and mechanism on environmental quality in different industry groups under environmental regulations. This study finds that,FDI has different characteristics on environmental quality in different industry groups: it shows a"positive U-shaped"relationship in industrial groups of capital-intensive and labor-intensive,while shows a"negative U-shaped"relationship in technology-intensive group,and has no significant impact on energy-intensive group; environmental regulation makes FDI change the size and direction of its impact path on environmental quality,and generally changes the impact of FDI on environmental quality: it leads to FDI's impact on environmental quality in capital-intensive group changes from improving to deteriorating,leads to the impact in energy-intensive group changes from non-significant to improving,weakens the improving impact in labor-intensive group and deteriorating impact in technology-intensive group. Therefore,the intensity of environmental regulation should be set according to the characteristics of the industry to promote the improvement of FDI's environmental quality.
引文
[1]Copeland,B.R.,Taylor,M.S.North-South Trade and the Environment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1994,109(3):755-787.
[2]Mani,M.,Wheeler,D.In search of pollution havens?Dirty Industry in the Word Economy,1960 to 1995[J].Journal of Environment and Development,1998,7(3):215-247.
[3]张宇,蒋殿春.FDI、政府监管与中国水污染---基于产业结构与技术进步分解指标的实证检验[J].经济学(季刊),2014(2):491-514.
[4]Eskeland G.,Harrison E.Moving to Green Pastures?Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis[J].Journal of Development Economics,2003,70(1):1-23.
[5]盛斌,吕越.外商直接投资对中国环境的影响-来自工业行业面板数据的实证研究[J].中国社会科学,2012(5):54-75.
[6]李金凯,程立燕,张同斌.外商直接投资是否具有“污染光环”效应?[J].中国人口·资源与环境[J].2017,27(10):74-83.
[7]Grossman G.M.,Krueger A.B.Economic Growth and the Environment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110(2):353-377.
[8]He J.Pollution Haven Hypothesis and Environmental Impacts of Foreign Direct Investment:The Case of Industrial Emission of Sulfur Dioxide(SO2)in Chinese Provinces[J].Ecological Econimics,2006,60(1):228-245.
[9]詹正华,蔡世强.长三角地区FDI、经济增长与碳排放研究[J].商业研究,2014(4):36-42.
[10]张志强.环境规制提高了中国城市环境质量吗?---基于“拟自然实验”的证据[J].产业经济研究,2017(3):69-80.
[11]郑强,冉光和.中国双向FDI的绿色生产率溢出效应---基于动态面板模型的实证检验[J].统计与信息论坛,2018(6):54-61.
[12]惠炜,赵国庆.环境规制与污染避难所效应---基于中国省际数据的面板门槛回归分析[J].经济理论与经济管理,2017(2):23-33.
[13]张博,韩复龄.环境规制、隐性经济与环境污染[J].财经问题研究,2017(6):22-29.
[14]Sumlders S,Yacov T,Amos Z.Announcing Climate Policy:Can a Green Paradox Arise Without Scarcity?[J].Journal of Environmental Economic and Management,2012,64(3):364-376.
[15]Hendrik R,Mark S.Unilateral Climate Policy:Harmful or Even Disastrous?[J].Environmental and Resource Economics,2014,58(1):155-178.
[16]李程宇,邵帅.可预期减排政策会引发“绿色悖论”效应吗?---基于中国供给侧改革与资本稀缺性视角的考察[J].系统工程理论与实践,2017,37(5):1184-1200.
[17]孙淑琴,何青青.不同制造业的外资进入与环境质量:“天堂”还是“光环”?[J].山东大学学报,2018(2):90-100.
[18]赵细康.环境保护与产业国际竞争力[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003:215-218.
[2]Mani,M.,Wheeler,D.In search of pollution havens?Dirty Industry in the Word Economy,1960 to 1995[J].Journal of Environment and Development,1998,7(3):215-247.
[3]张宇,蒋殿春.FDI、政府监管与中国水污染---基于产业结构与技术进步分解指标的实证检验[J].经济学(季刊),2014(2):491-514.
[4]Eskeland G.,Harrison E.Moving to Green Pastures?Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis[J].Journal of Development Economics,2003,70(1):1-23.
[5]盛斌,吕越.外商直接投资对中国环境的影响-来自工业行业面板数据的实证研究[J].中国社会科学,2012(5):54-75.
[6]李金凯,程立燕,张同斌.外商直接投资是否具有“污染光环”效应?[J].中国人口·资源与环境[J].2017,27(10):74-83.
[7]Grossman G.M.,Krueger A.B.Economic Growth and the Environment[J].Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,110(2):353-377.
[8]He J.Pollution Haven Hypothesis and Environmental Impacts of Foreign Direct Investment:The Case of Industrial Emission of Sulfur Dioxide(SO2)in Chinese Provinces[J].Ecological Econimics,2006,60(1):228-245.
[9]詹正华,蔡世强.长三角地区FDI、经济增长与碳排放研究[J].商业研究,2014(4):36-42.
[10]张志强.环境规制提高了中国城市环境质量吗?---基于“拟自然实验”的证据[J].产业经济研究,2017(3):69-80.
[11]郑强,冉光和.中国双向FDI的绿色生产率溢出效应---基于动态面板模型的实证检验[J].统计与信息论坛,2018(6):54-61.
[12]惠炜,赵国庆.环境规制与污染避难所效应---基于中国省际数据的面板门槛回归分析[J].经济理论与经济管理,2017(2):23-33.
[13]张博,韩复龄.环境规制、隐性经济与环境污染[J].财经问题研究,2017(6):22-29.
[14]Sumlders S,Yacov T,Amos Z.Announcing Climate Policy:Can a Green Paradox Arise Without Scarcity?[J].Journal of Environmental Economic and Management,2012,64(3):364-376.
[15]Hendrik R,Mark S.Unilateral Climate Policy:Harmful or Even Disastrous?[J].Environmental and Resource Economics,2014,58(1):155-178.
[16]李程宇,邵帅.可预期减排政策会引发“绿色悖论”效应吗?---基于中国供给侧改革与资本稀缺性视角的考察[J].系统工程理论与实践,2017,37(5):1184-1200.
[17]孙淑琴,何青青.不同制造业的外资进入与环境质量:“天堂”还是“光环”?[J].山东大学学报,2018(2):90-100.
[18]赵细康.环境保护与产业国际竞争力[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2003:215-218.