中国省域生态文明建设对碳排放强度的影响
|
摘要
生态文明建设作为新时代中国高质量发展的新理念和新目标,需要生态经济文明、生态社会文明和生态环境文明三个子系统协同推进与共同发展。降低碳排放强度是全球变暖背景下中国政府生态文明建设面临的重要问题和必然选择。研究生态文明建设对碳排放强度的影响,尤其从不同维度厘清生态文明建设不同子系统对碳排放强度的具体影响具有重要的理论和现实意义。利用2004—2016年中国省域面板数据,在STIRPAT模型基础上建立空间杜宾模型,实证分析了生态经济文明、生态社会文明、生态环境文明对碳排放强度的影响。结果表明:①中国各省域碳排放强度的Moran’s I指数在0. 425～0. 473之间,存在明显的空间正相关性,相互之间的碳排放强度可以相互影响,其原因在于相邻省域之间存在密切联系并且自然和经济社会特征具有一定相似性。②生态经济文明、生态社会文明、生态环境文明与碳排放强度之间的相关系数分别是-4. 743 139、2. 865 884、-0. 324 6447,生态经济文明和生态环境文明可以降低碳排放强度,生态社会文明提高了碳排放强度。通过生态文明建设降低碳排放强度需要三个子系统均对碳排放强度产生负向影响,需要进一步转变生态社会文明对碳排放强度的影响效应,实现生态文明建设全面降低碳排放强度。③生态社会文明空间溢出效应没有通过显著性检验,生态经济文明、生态环境文明空间溢出效应的相关系数分别是2. 046 531、-3. 238 323,生态经济文明上升造成了周边省域碳排放强度上升,生态环境文明上升促进了周边省域碳排放强度下降。相邻省域之间需要确立共同的生态经济文明目标,建立跨省域减少碳排放合作机制,实现生态文明建设水平提高的同时共同致力于碳排放强度降低。
Ecological civilization construction is the new concept and trend of China's high quality development in new era,and it needs the collaborative propulsion of ecological economic civilization, ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization. Reducing carbon emission intensity is an important issue facing Chinese government in the background of global warming.Studying the influence of ecological civilization construction to carbon emission intensity from different dimensions has important theoretical and practical significance. The influence of ecological economic civilization,ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization to carbon emission intensity was empirically analysed by using China provinces' panel data in 2004-2016 and spatial Durbin model based on STIRPAT model. The results show that: first,Moran's I of China provinces' carbon emission intensity was between 0. 425 ～ 0. 473. It shows obvious positive spatial correlation and illustrates that China provinces' carbon emission intensity can influence each other. The reasons include the close ties between neighboring province and the similarity of natural,economic and social characteristics. Second, the correlation coefficients of ecological economic civilization, ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization to carbon emission intensity were as follows:-4. 743 139,2. 865 884,-0. 324 644 7. It illustrates ecological economic civilization and ecological environment civilization can reduce carbon emission intensity,while ecological social civilization can increase carbon emission intensity. To reduce carbon emission intensity by ecological civilization,three subsystems of ecological civilization needs to produce negative influence to carbon emission intensity,the effect of ecological social civilization on carbon emission intensity needs to be changed,and thus we can realize the total reduction of carbon emission intensity.Third,ecological social civilization's spatial spillover effect cannot pass the significance test. The correlation coefficients of spatial spillover effects of ecological economic civilization and ecological environment civilization were 2. 046 531 and-3. 238 323 respectively. It illustrates that the improvement of ecological economic civilization can cause the increase of carbon emission intensity of the periphery provinces,while the improvement of ecological environment civilization can promote the reduction of carbon emission intensity of the periphery provinces. Enhancing cooperation between periphery provinces and establishing trans-provincial reducing carbon emission cooperation mechanism are needed.
Ecological civilization construction is the new concept and trend of China's high quality development in new era,and it needs the collaborative propulsion of ecological economic civilization, ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization. Reducing carbon emission intensity is an important issue facing Chinese government in the background of global warming.Studying the influence of ecological civilization construction to carbon emission intensity from different dimensions has important theoretical and practical significance. The influence of ecological economic civilization,ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization to carbon emission intensity was empirically analysed by using China provinces' panel data in 2004-2016 and spatial Durbin model based on STIRPAT model. The results show that: first,Moran's I of China provinces' carbon emission intensity was between 0. 425 ～ 0. 473. It shows obvious positive spatial correlation and illustrates that China provinces' carbon emission intensity can influence each other. The reasons include the close ties between neighboring province and the similarity of natural,economic and social characteristics. Second, the correlation coefficients of ecological economic civilization, ecological social civilization and ecological environment civilization to carbon emission intensity were as follows:-4. 743 139,2. 865 884,-0. 324 644 7. It illustrates ecological economic civilization and ecological environment civilization can reduce carbon emission intensity,while ecological social civilization can increase carbon emission intensity. To reduce carbon emission intensity by ecological civilization,three subsystems of ecological civilization needs to produce negative influence to carbon emission intensity,the effect of ecological social civilization on carbon emission intensity needs to be changed,and thus we can realize the total reduction of carbon emission intensity.Third,ecological social civilization's spatial spillover effect cannot pass the significance test. The correlation coefficients of spatial spillover effects of ecological economic civilization and ecological environment civilization were 2. 046 531 and-3. 238 323 respectively. It illustrates that the improvement of ecological economic civilization can cause the increase of carbon emission intensity of the periphery provinces,while the improvement of ecological environment civilization can promote the reduction of carbon emission intensity of the periphery provinces. Enhancing cooperation between periphery provinces and establishing trans-provincial reducing carbon emission cooperation mechanism are needed.
引文
[1]吴舜泽,黄德生,刘智超,等.中国环境保护与经济发展关系的40年演变[J].环境保护,2018,46(2):14-20.
[2]任建兰,王亚平,程钰.从生态环境保护到生态文明建设:四十年的回顾与展望[J].山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(6):27-39.
[3]高世楫,王海芹,李维明.改革开放40年生态文明体制改革历程与取向观察[J].改革,2018(8):49-63.
[4]CUFFEY K M,VIMEUX F. Covariation of carbon dioxide and temperature from the Vostok ice core after deuterium-excess correction[J]. Nature,2001,412:523-527.
[5]OLIVIER J G J,JANSSENS M,MUNTEAN M,et al. Trends in global CO2emissions:2014 report[R]. Hague:PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency,2014.
[6]QUIRE C L,MORIARTY R,ANDREW R M,et al. Global carbon budget 2014[J]. Earth system science data discussions,2015,7(2):521-610.
[7]中国能源研究会.中国能源展望2030[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2016.
[8]欧阳志云.开创复合生态系统生态学,奠基生态文明建设:纪念著名生态学家王如松院士诞辰七十周年[J].生态学报,2017,37(17):5579-5583.
[9]樊杰.新时代“人地关系地域系统”研究刍议——兼议吴传钧先生的小事、大业[J].经济地理,2018,38(4):2-8.
[10]李艳芳,曲建武.城市生态文明建设评价指标体系设计与实证[J].统计与决策,2018(5):57-59.
[11]李平星,陈雯,高金龙.江苏省生态文明建设水平指标体系构建与评估[J].生态学杂志,2015,34(1):295-302.
[12]陈润羊,张贵祥,胡曾曾,等.京津冀区域生态文明评价研究[J].环境科学与技术,2018,41(6):188-196.
[13]柴琪宸,郭亚军,宫诚举,等.中国省域生态文明建设协调发展程度的综合评价[J].中国管理科学,2017,25(7):184-190.
[14]赵先贵,赵晶,马彩虹,等.基于足迹家族的甘肃省生态文明建设评价[J].干旱区研究,2016,33(6):1254-1261.
[15]廖冰,张智光.生态文明指标优化和权重计量的实证研究——基于PSIR与SEM相结合方法[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(4):779-791.
[16]宓泽锋,周灿,朱菲菲,等.生态文明建设的路径依赖与互动关系变化——基于2003—2015年长江经济带地级市面板数据[J].地理研究,2018,37(10):1915-1926.
[17]谷缙,任建兰,于庆,等.山东省生态文明建设评价及影响因素——基于投影寻踪和障碍度模型[J].华东经济管理,2018,32(8):19-26.
[18]成金华,彭昕杰,冯银.中国城市生态文明水平评价[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2018,18(2):102-113.
[19]吴小节,杨书燕,汪秀琼.中国生态文明重心转移的特征及影响因素[J].城市问题,2016(5):27-34.
[20]李巍,郗永勤.效率视角下的省域生态文明建设评价研究[J].生态学报,2016,36(22):7354-7363.
[21]王耕,李素娟,马奇飞.中国生态文明建设效率空间均衡性及格局演变特征[J].地理学报,2018,73(11):2198-2209.
[22]刘思明,侯鹏.生态文明建设国际比较研究:2008—2012[J].经济问题探索,2016(3):42-50.
[23]张欢,成金华,陈军,等.中国省域生态文明建设差异分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(6):22-29.
[24]孙剑锋,秦伟山,孙海燕,等.中国沿海城市海洋生态文明建设评价体系与水平测度[J].经济地理,2018,38(8):19-28.
[25]赵丽萍,李媛.产业结构对碳排放强度的影响[J].城市问题,2018(6):61-66.
[26]韩秀艳,孙涛,高明.新型城镇化建设、能源消费增长与碳排放强度控制研究[J].软科学,2018,32(9):90-93.
[27]YORK R,ROSA E A,DIETZ T. STIRPAT,IPAT and Im PACT:analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts[J]. Ecological economics,2003,46(3):351-365.
[28]马忠玉,肖宏伟.基于卫星夜间灯光数据的中国分省碳排放时空模拟[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):143-150.
[29]王少剑,苏泳娴,赵亚博.中国城市能源消费碳排放的区域差异、空间溢出效应及影响因素[J].地理学报,2018,73(3):414-428.
[30]XIE Y,WENG Q. World energy consumption pattern as revealed by DMSP-OLS nighttime light imagery[J]. GIScience&remote sensing,2016,53(2):1635-1649.
[31]SHIKWAMBANA L. Long-term observation of global black carbon,organic carbon and smoke using CALIPSO and MERRA-2 data[J]. Remote sensing letters,2019,10(4):373-380.
[32]蔡博峰,刘晓曼,陆军,等. 2005年中国城市CO2排放数据集[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(4):1-7.
[33]张琳杰,崔海洋.长江中游城市群产业结构优化对碳排放的影响[J].改革,2018(11):130-138.
[34]刘志红,曹俊文.碳排放强度与经济增长的关系:基于数量脱钩的实证研究[J].经济问题探索,2017(11):141-147.
[35]邝嫦娥,邹伟勇.环境规制与能源消费碳排放——理论分析及空间实证[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018,42(5):81-86.
[36]周莹莹.金融发展对碳排放的影响——以23个国家与地区为例[J].求索,2018(5):79-87.
[37]黎文勇,杨上广,吴玉鸣.区域市场一体化对碳排放效益的影响研究——来自长三角地区的空间计量分析[J].软科学,2018,32(9):52-71.
[38]张德钢.市场分割对碳排放效率的影响研究——基于固定效应面板随机前沿模型[J].软科学,2018,32(9):94-97.
[39]王锋,秦豫徽,刘娟,等.多维度城镇化视角下的碳排放影响因素研究——基于中国省域数据的空间杜宾面板模型[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):151-161.
[40]王宪恩,段志远,王培博,等. 1990—2014年典型国家技术变革与结构调整的碳排放驱动效应测度[J].资源科学,2018,40(11):2317-2327.
[41]王成新,苗毅,吴莹,等.中国高速铁路运营的减碳及经济环境互馈影响研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):171-177.
[42]吴昊,车国庆.中国人口年龄结构如何影响了地区碳排放?——基于动态空间STIRPAT模型的分析[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2018,58(3):67-77.
[43]郭杰,丁冠乔,刘晓曼,等.城镇景观格局对区域碳排放影响及其差别化管控研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(10):55-61.
[44]IMRAN K, MICHAEL W J, STEPHENSON J. Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in electricity systems using time-varying carbon intensity[J]. Journal of cleaner production,2018,184,(20):1091-1101.
[45]李波,刘雪琪,梅倩,等.湖北省农地利用方式变化的碳效应特征与空间差异[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(10):62-70.
[46]国家统计局.中国统计年鉴[J].北京:中国统计出版社,2005-2017.
[47]刘凯,任建兰,李雅楠.基于供需视角的黄河三角洲人地关系演变[J].经济地理,2018,38(6):28-34.
[48]刘贤赵,高长春,张勇,等.中国省域碳强度空间依赖格局及其影响因素的空间异质性研究[J].地理科学,2018,38(5):681-690.
[49]国家统计局能源司.中国能源统计年鉴[M].北京:中国统计出版社,2005-2017.
[2]任建兰,王亚平,程钰.从生态环境保护到生态文明建设:四十年的回顾与展望[J].山东大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018(6):27-39.
[3]高世楫,王海芹,李维明.改革开放40年生态文明体制改革历程与取向观察[J].改革,2018(8):49-63.
[4]CUFFEY K M,VIMEUX F. Covariation of carbon dioxide and temperature from the Vostok ice core after deuterium-excess correction[J]. Nature,2001,412:523-527.
[5]OLIVIER J G J,JANSSENS M,MUNTEAN M,et al. Trends in global CO2emissions:2014 report[R]. Hague:PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency,2014.
[6]QUIRE C L,MORIARTY R,ANDREW R M,et al. Global carbon budget 2014[J]. Earth system science data discussions,2015,7(2):521-610.
[7]中国能源研究会.中国能源展望2030[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2016.
[8]欧阳志云.开创复合生态系统生态学,奠基生态文明建设:纪念著名生态学家王如松院士诞辰七十周年[J].生态学报,2017,37(17):5579-5583.
[9]樊杰.新时代“人地关系地域系统”研究刍议——兼议吴传钧先生的小事、大业[J].经济地理,2018,38(4):2-8.
[10]李艳芳,曲建武.城市生态文明建设评价指标体系设计与实证[J].统计与决策,2018(5):57-59.
[11]李平星,陈雯,高金龙.江苏省生态文明建设水平指标体系构建与评估[J].生态学杂志,2015,34(1):295-302.
[12]陈润羊,张贵祥,胡曾曾,等.京津冀区域生态文明评价研究[J].环境科学与技术,2018,41(6):188-196.
[13]柴琪宸,郭亚军,宫诚举,等.中国省域生态文明建设协调发展程度的综合评价[J].中国管理科学,2017,25(7):184-190.
[14]赵先贵,赵晶,马彩虹,等.基于足迹家族的甘肃省生态文明建设评价[J].干旱区研究,2016,33(6):1254-1261.
[15]廖冰,张智光.生态文明指标优化和权重计量的实证研究——基于PSIR与SEM相结合方法[J].长江流域资源与环境,2018,27(4):779-791.
[16]宓泽锋,周灿,朱菲菲,等.生态文明建设的路径依赖与互动关系变化——基于2003—2015年长江经济带地级市面板数据[J].地理研究,2018,37(10):1915-1926.
[17]谷缙,任建兰,于庆,等.山东省生态文明建设评价及影响因素——基于投影寻踪和障碍度模型[J].华东经济管理,2018,32(8):19-26.
[18]成金华,彭昕杰,冯银.中国城市生态文明水平评价[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2018,18(2):102-113.
[19]吴小节,杨书燕,汪秀琼.中国生态文明重心转移的特征及影响因素[J].城市问题,2016(5):27-34.
[20]李巍,郗永勤.效率视角下的省域生态文明建设评价研究[J].生态学报,2016,36(22):7354-7363.
[21]王耕,李素娟,马奇飞.中国生态文明建设效率空间均衡性及格局演变特征[J].地理学报,2018,73(11):2198-2209.
[22]刘思明,侯鹏.生态文明建设国际比较研究:2008—2012[J].经济问题探索,2016(3):42-50.
[23]张欢,成金华,陈军,等.中国省域生态文明建设差异分析[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2014,24(6):22-29.
[24]孙剑锋,秦伟山,孙海燕,等.中国沿海城市海洋生态文明建设评价体系与水平测度[J].经济地理,2018,38(8):19-28.
[25]赵丽萍,李媛.产业结构对碳排放强度的影响[J].城市问题,2018(6):61-66.
[26]韩秀艳,孙涛,高明.新型城镇化建设、能源消费增长与碳排放强度控制研究[J].软科学,2018,32(9):90-93.
[27]YORK R,ROSA E A,DIETZ T. STIRPAT,IPAT and Im PACT:analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts[J]. Ecological economics,2003,46(3):351-365.
[28]马忠玉,肖宏伟.基于卫星夜间灯光数据的中国分省碳排放时空模拟[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):143-150.
[29]王少剑,苏泳娴,赵亚博.中国城市能源消费碳排放的区域差异、空间溢出效应及影响因素[J].地理学报,2018,73(3):414-428.
[30]XIE Y,WENG Q. World energy consumption pattern as revealed by DMSP-OLS nighttime light imagery[J]. GIScience&remote sensing,2016,53(2):1635-1649.
[31]SHIKWAMBANA L. Long-term observation of global black carbon,organic carbon and smoke using CALIPSO and MERRA-2 data[J]. Remote sensing letters,2019,10(4):373-380.
[32]蔡博峰,刘晓曼,陆军,等. 2005年中国城市CO2排放数据集[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(4):1-7.
[33]张琳杰,崔海洋.长江中游城市群产业结构优化对碳排放的影响[J].改革,2018(11):130-138.
[34]刘志红,曹俊文.碳排放强度与经济增长的关系:基于数量脱钩的实证研究[J].经济问题探索,2017(11):141-147.
[35]邝嫦娥,邹伟勇.环境规制与能源消费碳排放——理论分析及空间实证[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2018,42(5):81-86.
[36]周莹莹.金融发展对碳排放的影响——以23个国家与地区为例[J].求索,2018(5):79-87.
[37]黎文勇,杨上广,吴玉鸣.区域市场一体化对碳排放效益的影响研究——来自长三角地区的空间计量分析[J].软科学,2018,32(9):52-71.
[38]张德钢.市场分割对碳排放效率的影响研究——基于固定效应面板随机前沿模型[J].软科学,2018,32(9):94-97.
[39]王锋,秦豫徽,刘娟,等.多维度城镇化视角下的碳排放影响因素研究——基于中国省域数据的空间杜宾面板模型[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):151-161.
[40]王宪恩,段志远,王培博,等. 1990—2014年典型国家技术变革与结构调整的碳排放驱动效应测度[J].资源科学,2018,40(11):2317-2327.
[41]王成新,苗毅,吴莹,等.中国高速铁路运营的减碳及经济环境互馈影响研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2017,27(9):171-177.
[42]吴昊,车国庆.中国人口年龄结构如何影响了地区碳排放?——基于动态空间STIRPAT模型的分析[J].吉林大学社会科学学报,2018,58(3):67-77.
[43]郭杰,丁冠乔,刘晓曼,等.城镇景观格局对区域碳排放影响及其差别化管控研究[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(10):55-61.
[44]IMRAN K, MICHAEL W J, STEPHENSON J. Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in electricity systems using time-varying carbon intensity[J]. Journal of cleaner production,2018,184,(20):1091-1101.
[45]李波,刘雪琪,梅倩,等.湖北省农地利用方式变化的碳效应特征与空间差异[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2018,28(10):62-70.
[46]国家统计局.中国统计年鉴[J].北京:中国统计出版社,2005-2017.
[47]刘凯,任建兰,李雅楠.基于供需视角的黄河三角洲人地关系演变[J].经济地理,2018,38(6):28-34.
[48]刘贤赵,高长春,张勇,等.中国省域碳强度空间依赖格局及其影响因素的空间异质性研究[J].地理科学,2018,38(5):681-690.
[49]国家统计局能源司.中国能源统计年鉴[M].北京:中国统计出版社,2005-2017.
© 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 |