中国区域生态福利绩效水平及其空间效应研究
|
摘要
传统的经济增长观存在诸多弊端,增长只是手段而非最终目的,必须从弱可持续发展的观念转向强可持续发展。提高生态福利绩效就是以最小资源消耗获得最大的福利水平,本质上是可持续发展更广义的延伸。基于Daly的基本思想,区别于经济增长以及生态效率理念,本文运用超效率DEA和空间计量方法研究了中国2005—2016年区域生态福利绩效水平及其空间效应。研究发现:①区域生态福利绩效水平呈现"东部最高,中部次之,西部最低"的格局,时间趋势上经历了"下降-上升-下降-上升"四个阶段。②生态福利绩效水平表现出较强的空间相关性,存在比较稳定路径依赖性,体现为东部地区高值-高值集聚以及西部地区的低值-低值集聚。③通过空间杜宾面板模型以及溢出效应分解得出能源结构对本地区生态福利绩效水平具有负的影响,对其他地区则表现为正向作用,城镇化水平、产业结构因素无论是直接效应还是间接效应都对生态福利绩效水平具有抑制作用。外商直接投资不仅促进本地区生态福利绩效水平,对其他地区也具有提升作用,并且间接效应明显高于对本地区的直接影响,"污染天堂"的假说不一定成立。④"福利门槛"的假设在引入空间因素后依然成立,生态福利绩效与经济发展水平表现为倒"U型"关系。在此基础上,本文从城镇化、能源结构、产业结构、外商直接投资以及空间溢出效应等方面对提升中国区域生态福利绩效水平提供了一些政策建议。
The traditional view of economic growth has many drawbacks. Growth is only a means and not an ultimate goal. It must change from the idea of weak sustainable development to that of strong sustainable development. To improve the ecological well-being performance is to obtain the maximum welfare level with the minimum resource consumption,which is essentially a broader extension of sustainable development. Based on Daly's main idea,different from economic growth and eco-efficiency concept,this paper studied China's regional level and its spatial effect from the perspective of ecological well-being performance by using super-efficiency DEA and spatial measurement. The study found that: ①The performance level of regional ecological well-being in China presented a pattern of‘the highest in the east,the second in the middle and the lowest in the west',and the time trend had experienced four stages of‘decline-rise-decline-rise'. ②The performance level of ecological well-being showed a strong spatial correlation and a relatively stable path dependence,which was reflected in the high-value to high-value concentration in the eastern region and the low-value to low-value concentration in the western region. ③Through the spatial Dubin panel model and the decomposition of spillover effects,it is concluded that the energy structure had a negative impact on the performance level of ecological well-being in this region,while it had a positive effect on other regions. The urbanization level and industrial structure factors,whether direct or indirect,had an inhibitory effect on the performance level of ecological well-being. Foreign direct investment not only promoted the level of ecological well-being performance in the region,but also promoted other regions,and the indirect effect was significantly higher than the direct effect on the region. The hypothesis of‘Polluting Heaven'was not necessarily correct. ④ The hypothesis of ‘welfare threshold'still held after introducing spatial factors, and there was the inverted ‘U '-shaped relationship between ecological well-being performance and economic development level. On this basis,this paper provided some policy suggestions to improve China's regional ecological well-being performance from the aspects of urbanization,energy structure,industrial structure optimization,foreign direct investment and spatial spillover effect.
The traditional view of economic growth has many drawbacks. Growth is only a means and not an ultimate goal. It must change from the idea of weak sustainable development to that of strong sustainable development. To improve the ecological well-being performance is to obtain the maximum welfare level with the minimum resource consumption,which is essentially a broader extension of sustainable development. Based on Daly's main idea,different from economic growth and eco-efficiency concept,this paper studied China's regional level and its spatial effect from the perspective of ecological well-being performance by using super-efficiency DEA and spatial measurement. The study found that: ①The performance level of regional ecological well-being in China presented a pattern of‘the highest in the east,the second in the middle and the lowest in the west',and the time trend had experienced four stages of‘decline-rise-decline-rise'. ②The performance level of ecological well-being showed a strong spatial correlation and a relatively stable path dependence,which was reflected in the high-value to high-value concentration in the eastern region and the low-value to low-value concentration in the western region. ③Through the spatial Dubin panel model and the decomposition of spillover effects,it is concluded that the energy structure had a negative impact on the performance level of ecological well-being in this region,while it had a positive effect on other regions. The urbanization level and industrial structure factors,whether direct or indirect,had an inhibitory effect on the performance level of ecological well-being. Foreign direct investment not only promoted the level of ecological well-being performance in the region,but also promoted other regions,and the indirect effect was significantly higher than the direct effect on the region. The hypothesis of‘Polluting Heaven'was not necessarily correct. ④ The hypothesis of ‘welfare threshold'still held after introducing spatial factors, and there was the inverted ‘U '-shaped relationship between ecological well-being performance and economic development level. On this basis,this paper provided some policy suggestions to improve China's regional ecological well-being performance from the aspects of urbanization,energy structure,industrial structure optimization,foreign direct investment and spatial spillover effect.
引文
[1]MANFRED M N.Economic growth and quality of life:a threshold hypothesis[J].Ecological economics,1995,15:115-118.
[2]PHILIP L,MATTHEW C.The end of economic growth?a contracting threshol hypothesis[J].Ecological economics,2010,69(11):2213-2223.
[3]EASTERLIN R A.Does economic growth improve the human lot?some empirical evidence[J].Nations and households in economic growth,1974:89-125.
[4]DALY H E.Beyond growth:the economics of sustainable development[M].Missouri:Beacon Press,1996.
[5]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.
[6]诸大建.从“里约+20”看绿色经济新理念和新趋势[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,22(9):1-7.
[7]RAWORTH K.A safe and just space for humanity[R].[2018-09-01].https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/dpasafe-and-just-space-for-humanity-130212-en.pdf.
[8]诸大建.解读生态文明下的中国绿色经济[J].环境保护科学,2015,41(5):16-21.
[9]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.
[10]诸大建,张帅.生态福利绩效与深化可持续发展的研究[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2014(5):106-115.
[11]臧漫丹,诸大建,刘国平.生态福利绩效:概念、内涵及G20实证[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013(5):118-124.
[12]冯吉芳,袁健红.中国区域生态福利绩效及其影响因素[J].中国科技论坛,2016(3):100-105.
[13]徐昱东,亓朋,童临风.中国省级地区生态福利绩效水平时空分异格局研究[J].区域经济评论,2017(4):123-131.
[14]YEW K.Environmentally responsible happy nation index:towards an internationally acceptable national success indicator[J].Social indicators research,2008,85(4):425-446.
[15]JORGENSON A K.Economic development and the carbon intensity of human well-being[J].Nature climate change,2014,4(3):186-189.
[16]KUBISZEWSKI I,COSTANZA R,FRANCO C,et al.Beyond GDP:measuring and achieving global genuine progress[J].Ecological economics,2013,93(3):57-68.
[17]ABDALLAH S,THOMPSON S,MICHAELSON J,et al.The Happy Planet Index 2.0:why good lives don’t have to cost the earth[R].London:New Economics Foundation,1970.
[18]COMMON M.Measuring national economic performance without using prices[J].Ecological economics,2007,64(1):92-102.
[19]DIETZ T,ROSA E,YORK R.Environmentally efficient well-being:rethinking sustainability as the relationship between human wellbeing and environmental impacts[J].Human ecology review,2009,16(1):114-123.
[20]DIMARIA C.An indicator for the economic performance and ecological sustainbility of nations[J].Environmental modeling&assessment,2018(2):1-16.
[21]韩瑾.生态福利绩效评价及影响因素研究——以宁波市为例[J].经济论坛,2017(10):49-53.
[22]BJORNSKOV C.How comparable are the gall up world poll life satisfaction data?[J].Journal of happiness studies,2010,11(1):41-60.
[23]郭炳南,卜亚.长江经济带城市生态福利绩效评价及影响因素研究——以长江经济带110个城市为例[J].企业经济,2018(8):30-37.
[24]刘国平,诸大建.中国碳排放、经济增长与福利关系研究[J].财贸研究,2011(6):83-88.
[25]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.
[26]肖黎明,吉荟茹.绿色技术创新视域下中国生态福利绩效的时空演变及影响因素——基于省域尺度的数据检验[J].科技管理研究,2018(17):244-251.
[27]CHARNES A,COOPER W W,RHODES E.Measuring the efficiency of decison making units[J].European journal of operational research,1978,2(6):429-444.
[28]TONE K.A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J].European journal of operational research,2001,130(3):498-509.
[29]TONE K.A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J].European journal of operational research,2002,143(1):32-41.
[30]TOBLER W R.A computer movie simulating urban growth in the detroit region[J].Economic geography,1970,46(2):234-240.
[2]PHILIP L,MATTHEW C.The end of economic growth?a contracting threshol hypothesis[J].Ecological economics,2010,69(11):2213-2223.
[3]EASTERLIN R A.Does economic growth improve the human lot?some empirical evidence[J].Nations and households in economic growth,1974:89-125.
[4]DALY H E.Beyond growth:the economics of sustainable development[M].Missouri:Beacon Press,1996.
[5]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.
[6]诸大建.从“里约+20”看绿色经济新理念和新趋势[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2012,22(9):1-7.
[7]RAWORTH K.A safe and just space for humanity[R].[2018-09-01].https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/dpasafe-and-just-space-for-humanity-130212-en.pdf.
[8]诸大建.解读生态文明下的中国绿色经济[J].环境保护科学,2015,41(5):16-21.
[9]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.
[10]诸大建,张帅.生态福利绩效与深化可持续发展的研究[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版),2014(5):106-115.
[11]臧漫丹,诸大建,刘国平.生态福利绩效:概念、内涵及G20实证[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2013(5):118-124.
[12]冯吉芳,袁健红.中国区域生态福利绩效及其影响因素[J].中国科技论坛,2016(3):100-105.
[13]徐昱东,亓朋,童临风.中国省级地区生态福利绩效水平时空分异格局研究[J].区域经济评论,2017(4):123-131.
[14]YEW K.Environmentally responsible happy nation index:towards an internationally acceptable national success indicator[J].Social indicators research,2008,85(4):425-446.
[15]JORGENSON A K.Economic development and the carbon intensity of human well-being[J].Nature climate change,2014,4(3):186-189.
[16]KUBISZEWSKI I,COSTANZA R,FRANCO C,et al.Beyond GDP:measuring and achieving global genuine progress[J].Ecological economics,2013,93(3):57-68.
[17]ABDALLAH S,THOMPSON S,MICHAELSON J,et al.The Happy Planet Index 2.0:why good lives don’t have to cost the earth[R].London:New Economics Foundation,1970.
[18]COMMON M.Measuring national economic performance without using prices[J].Ecological economics,2007,64(1):92-102.
[19]DIETZ T,ROSA E,YORK R.Environmentally efficient well-being:rethinking sustainability as the relationship between human wellbeing and environmental impacts[J].Human ecology review,2009,16(1):114-123.
[20]DIMARIA C.An indicator for the economic performance and ecological sustainbility of nations[J].Environmental modeling&assessment,2018(2):1-16.
[21]韩瑾.生态福利绩效评价及影响因素研究——以宁波市为例[J].经济论坛,2017(10):49-53.
[22]BJORNSKOV C.How comparable are the gall up world poll life satisfaction data?[J].Journal of happiness studies,2010,11(1):41-60.
[23]郭炳南,卜亚.长江经济带城市生态福利绩效评价及影响因素研究——以长江经济带110个城市为例[J].企业经济,2018(8):30-37.
[24]刘国平,诸大建.中国碳排放、经济增长与福利关系研究[J].财贸研究,2011(6):83-88.
[25]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.
[26]肖黎明,吉荟茹.绿色技术创新视域下中国生态福利绩效的时空演变及影响因素——基于省域尺度的数据检验[J].科技管理研究,2018(17):244-251.
[27]CHARNES A,COOPER W W,RHODES E.Measuring the efficiency of decison making units[J].European journal of operational research,1978,2(6):429-444.
[28]TONE K.A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J].European journal of operational research,2001,130(3):498-509.
[29]TONE K.A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis[J].European journal of operational research,2002,143(1):32-41.
[30]TOBLER W R.A computer movie simulating urban growth in the detroit region[J].Economic geography,1970,46(2):234-240.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |