Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 31, pp 31654–31666 | Cite as

Determining the factors driving energy demand in the Sichuan–Chongqing region: an examination based on DEA-Malmquist approach and spatial characteristics

  • Junbing HuangEmail author
  • Tianchi Yang
  • Jing Jia
Research Article
First Online:
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Since the “China Western Development” plan was initiated in 2000, the Sichuan–Chongqing region has experienced rapid economic growth, especially in the energy segment. However, energy shortage and environmental degradation currently pose a significant hurdle for sustainable development in this region. In the existing literature on factors driving the energy demand, the effect of technological progress on energy demand is discussed as a whole, but few papers have investigated the effect of technological progress from the perspective of its components. Additionally, existing studies have neglected the temporal and spatial aspect of energy demand, thereby generating biased and unreasonable results. Correspondingly, in the current study, the factors driving the per capita energy demand in the Sichuan–Chongqing region over the 2005–2016 period were, to the best of our knowledge, explored for the first time by employing the data envelopment analysis–Malmquist method and spatial dynamic panel model concurrently. The empirical results suggest that an improvement in total factor productivity (TFP) plays a positive but insignificant role in decreasing energy demand. Additionally, there is clear evidence that the effect of TFP on energy demand primarily emerges through spatial spillover effects and their components.

Keywords

Sichuan–Chongqing region Data envelop analysis Malmquist method Spatial dynamic model 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors especially appreciate the three anonymous reviewers and the Editor, Prof. Garrigues, for their insightful and helpful comments and suggestions.

Funding information

This study received financial support from the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (no. JBK1901032).

References

  1. Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev Econ Stud 58:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arellano M, Bond S (1998) Dynamic panel data estimation using DPD98 for GAUSS, mimeo. Institute for Fiscal Studies, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Arellano M, Bover O (1995) Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. J Econ 68:29–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blundell R, Bond S (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. J Econ 87:115–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen CH, Huang JB, Chang HG, Lie HY (2019a) The effects of indigenous R&D activities on China’s energy intensity: a regional perspective. Sci Total Environ 689:1066–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen JD, Xu C, Cui LB, Song ML (2019b) Driving factors of CO2 emissions and inequality characteristics in China: a combined decomposition approach. Energy Econ 78:589–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen JD, Xu C, Managi S, Song ML (2019c) Energy-carbon performance and its changing trend: an example from China’s construction industry. Resour Conserv Recycl 145:379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dietz T, Rosa EA (1994) Rethinking the environmental impacts of population, affluence and technology. Hum Ecol Rev 1:277–300Google Scholar
  9. Ehrlich PR, Holdren JP (1971) Impact of population growth. Science 171(3977):1212–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fang WS, Miller SM (2013) The effect of ESCOs on carbon dioxide emissions. Appl Econ 45:4796–4804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Norris M, Zhang Z (1994) Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. Am Econ Rev 84:66–83Google Scholar
  12. Gilio L, Moraes MAF (2016) Sugarcane industry’s socioeconomic impact in São Paulo, Brazil: a spatial dynamic panel approach. Energy Econ 58:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hao Y, Peng H (2017) On the convergence in China’s provincial per capita energy consumption: new evidence from a spatial econometric analysis. Energy Econ 68:31–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huang JB, Du D, Tao QZ (2017) An analysis of technological factors and energy intensity in China. Energy Policy 109:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huang JB (2018) Investigating the driving forces of China’s carbon intensity based on a dynamic spatial model. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:21833–21843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huang JB, Hao Y, Lei HY (2018) Indigenous versus foreign innovation and energy intensity in China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:1721–1729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang JB, Cai XC, Huang S, Tian S, Lei HY (2019a) Technological factors and total factor productivity in China: evidence based on a panel threshold model. China Econ Rev 54:271–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huang JB, Liu CH, Chen SX, Huang X, Hao Y (2019b) The convergence characteristics of China’s carbon intensity: evidence from a dynamic spatial panel approach. Sci Total Environ 668:685–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang JB, Zheng XM, Wang AL, Cai XC (2019c) Convergence analysis of China’s energy intensity at the industrial sector level. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(8):7730–7742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li B, Liu XJ, Li ZH (2015) Using the STIRPAT model to explore the factors driving regional CO2 emissions: a case of Tianjin, China. Nat Hazards 76:1667–1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li JL, Liu HX, Du KR (2019) Does market-oriented reform increase energy rebound effect? Evidence from China’s regional development. China Econ Rev 56:101304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu L, Huang JB, Yu SW (2016) Prediction of primary energy demand in China based on AGAEDE optimal model. Chin J Popul Resour Environ 14:16–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu L, Zhou C, Huang JB, Hao Y (2018) The impact of financial development on energy demand: evidence from China. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 54:269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Long XL, Chen B, Park B (2018a) Effect of 2008’s Beijing Olympic Games on environmental efficiency of 268 China's cities. J Clean Prod 172:1423–1432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Long X, Naminse EY, Du JG, Zhuang JC (2015a) Nonrenewable energy, renewable energy, carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth in China from 1952 to 2012. Renew Sust Energ Rev 52:680–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Long XL, Wu C, Zhang JJ, Zhang J (2018b) Environmental efficiency for 192 thermal power plants in the Yangtze River Delta considering heterogeneity: a metafrontier directional slacks-based measure approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:3962–3971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Long XL, Zhao XC, Cheng FX (2015b) The comparison analysis of total factor productivity and eco-efficiency in China’s cement manufactures. Energy Policy 81:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ma CB, Stern DI (2008) China’s changing energy intensity trend: a decomposition analysis. Energy Econ 30:1037–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ma Y, Shi T, Zhang W, Hao Y, Huang JB, Lin Y (2019) Comprehensive policy evaluation of NEV development in China, Japan, the United States, and Germany based on the AHP-EW model. J Clean Prod 214:389–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mishra V, Sharma S, Smyth R (2009) Are fluctuations in energy consumption per capita transitory? Evidence from a panel of Pacific Island countries. Energy Policy 37:2318–2326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. National Bureau of Statistics of China (2017) Beijing: China Statistics Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  32. Shahbaz M, Chaudhary AR, Ozturk L (2017) Does urbanization cause increasing energy demand in Pakistan? Empirical evidence from STIRPAT model. Energy 122:83–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sheng YW, Miao Y, Song JP, Shen HY (2019) The moderating effect of innovation on the relationship between urbanization and CO2 emissions: evidence from three major urban agglomerations in China. Sustainability 11:1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Waggoner PE, Ausubel JH (2002) A framework for sustainability science: a renovated IPAT identity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 12:7860–7865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang CJ, Wang F (2017) China can lead on climate change. Science 357(6353):764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang CJ, Wang F, Zhang XX, Yang Y, Su YX, Ye YY, Zhang HO (2017) Examining the driving factors of energy related carbon emissions using the extended STIRPAT model based on IPAT identity in Xinjiang. Renew Sust Energ Rev 67:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang QR, Yang XM (2019) Urbanization impact on residential energy consumption in China: the roles of income, urbanization level, and urban density. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:3542–3555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wei TY, Zhou JJ, Zhang HX (2019) Rebound effect of energy intensity reduction on energy consumption. Resour Conserv Recycl 144:233–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yu XM, Geng Y, Dong HJ, Ulgiati S, Liu Z, Liu ZX, Ma ZX, Tian X, Sun L (2016) Sustainability assessment of one industrial region: a combined method of emergy analysis and IPAT (human impact population affluence technology). Energy 107:818–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhang C, Lin Y (2012) Panel estimation for urbanisation, energy consumption and CO2 emissions: a regional analysis in China. Energy Policy 40:488–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zheng XY, Yu YH, Wang J, Deng HH (2014) Identifying the determinants and spatial nexus of provincial carbon intensity in China: a dynamic spatial panel approach. Reg Environ Chang 14:1651–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EconomicsSouthwestern University of Finance and EconomicsChengduChina
  2. 2.Western China Center for Economic ResearchSouthwestern University of Finance and EconomicsChengduChina

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options