Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Environmentally sensitive productivity growth and its decompositions in China: a metafrontier Malmquist–Luenberger productivity index approach

  • Published:
Empirical Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The metafrontier Malmquist–Luenberger (MML) index was used to measure the environmentally sensitive productivity and analyze its decompositions on China’s regional productivity growth. Using the MML index, the environmental undesirable outputs and regional heterogeneities were analyzed simultaneously. The empirical results showed that although China had accomplished rapid growth rate of GDP over the last decade, environmentally sensitive productivity has been relatively constant with a low growth rate. The productivity growth is driven mainly by technology innovation. Regarding the regional differences, the eastern area showed the highest productivity growth, whereas the central and western areas showed productivity deterioration. Some implications and suggestions on the regional differences are proposed based on the empirical results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. RMB is the official currency of China.

References

  • Battese GE, Rao DSP (2002) Technology gap, efficiency, and a stochastic metafrontier function. Int J Bus Econ 1:87–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Battese GE, Rao DSP, O’Donnell CJ (2004) A metafrontier production function for estimation of technical efficiencies and technology gaps for firms operating under different technologies. J Prod Anal 21:91–103

  • Bian Y, Yang F (2010) Resource and environment efficiency analysis of provinces in China: a DEA approach based on Shannon’s entropy. Energy Policy 38:1909–1917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BP (2011) Statistical review of world energy. http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview

  • Chang TP, Hu JL (2010) Total-factor energy productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change: an empirical study of China. Appl Energy 87:3262–3270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi Y, Lee EY (2009) Optimizing risk management for the sustainable performance of the regional innovation system in Korea through meta-mediation. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 15:270–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi Y, Lee EY, Wu DD (2010) The risk-effective sustainability of policies: the small business credit environment in Korea. Int J of Environ. and Pollut 42:317–329

  • Choi Y, Zhang N, Zhou P (2012) Efficiency and abatement costs of energy-related \({\rm CO}_2\) emissions in China: a slacks-based efficiency measure. Appl Energy 98:198–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung YH, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1997) Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J Environ Manag 51:229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Norris M, Zhang Z (1994) Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. Am Econ Rev 84:66–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe R, Grosskopf S, Pasurka CA Jr (2001) Accounting for air pollution emissions in measures of state manufacturing productivity growth. J Reg Sci 41:381–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo X, Zhu L, Fan Y, Xie B (2011) Evaluation of potential reductions in carbon emissions in Chinese provinces based on environmental DEA. Energy Policy 39:2352–2360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu JL (2006) Efficient air pollution abatement for regions in China. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 13:327–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu JL, Wang SC (2006) Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy 34:3206–3217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2006) IPCC guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol2.html

  • Jeon BM, Sickles RC (2004) The role of environmental factors in growth accounting. J Appl Econ 19:567–591

  • Krugman P (1994) The myth of Asia’s miracle. Foreign Aff 73:62–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S (2006) Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: a global analysis using Malmquist–Luenberger index. Ecol Econ 56:280–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li LB, Hu JL (2012) Ecological total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy Policy 46:216–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindmark M (2004) Patterns of historical \({{\rm CO}_2}\) intensity transitions among high and low-income countries. Explor Econ Hist 41:426–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano M, Managi S (2008) Regulatory reforms and productivity: an empirical analysis of the Japanese electricity industry. Energy Policy 36:201–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC) (2005) China Statistical Year book 2010. China Statistics Press, Beijing

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC) (2011) China Statistical Year book 2010. China Statistics Press, Beijing

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC) (2002–2010a) China Statistical Year book 2010, China Statistics Press, Beijing

  • National Bureau of Statistics of China (NBSC) (2002–2010b) China Energy Statistical Year book, China Statistics Press, Beijing

  • National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) (2007) National Greenhouse Gas Inventory of the People’s Republic of China (in Chinese). Chinese Environmental Science Press, Beijing

  • Oh DH (2010) A metafrontier approach for measuring an environmentally sensitive productivity growth index. Energy Econ 32:146–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh DH, Lee JD (2010) A metafrontier approach for measuring Malmquist Productivity Index. Empirical Econ 32:46–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi GM, Bi J, Wang J (2010) Chinese regional industrial energy efficiency evaluation based on a DEA model of fixing non-energy inputs. Energy Policy 38:6172–6179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulkens H, Vanden Eeckaut P (1995) Non-parametric efficiency, progress and regress measures for panel data: methodological aspects. Eur J Oper Res 80:474–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber W, Domazlicky B (2001) Productivity growth and pollution in state manufacturing. Rev Econ Stat 83:195–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei YM, Liao H, Fan Y (2007) An empirical analysis of energy efficiency in China’s iron and steel sector. Energy 32:2262–2270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y (2009) China’s capital stock series by region and sector. The University of Western Australia Discussion Paper 09.02

  • Wu Y (2010) Regional environmental performance and its determinants in China. China World Econ 18:73–89

  • Yeh T, Chen T, Lai P (2010) A comparative study of energy utilization efficiency between Taiwan and China. Energy Policy 38:2386–2394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yörük BK, Zaim O (2005) Productivity growth in OECD countries: a comparison with Malmquist indices. J Comp Econ 33:401–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu MM, Hsu SH, Chang CC, Lee DH (2008) Productivity growth of Taiwan’s major domestic airports in the presence of aircraft noise. Transp Res E 44:543–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang C, Liu H, Bressers H, Buchanan K (2011) Productivity growth and environmental regulations—accounting for undesirable outputs: analysis of China’s thirty provincial regions using the Malmquist-Luenberger index. Ecol Econ 70:2369–2379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang N, Choi Y (2013a) Total-factor carbon emission performance of fossil fuel power plants in China: a metafrontier non-radial Malmquist index analysis. Energy Econ 40:549–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang N, Choi Y (2013b) A comparative study of dynamic changes in \({\rm CO}_2\) emission performance of fossil fuel power plants in China and Korea. Energy Policy 62:324–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou P, Ang BW (2008) Linear programming models for measuring economy-wide energy efficiency performance. Energy Policy 36:2911–2916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou P, Ang BW, Zhou DQ (2012) Measuring economy-wide energy efficiency performance: a parametric frontier approach. Appl Energy 90:196–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was jointly supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT, and Future Planning (NRF-2012R1A1A1013071); Inha University; National Science foundation of China (41461118); China Postdoctoral Foundation (2014M551849); and Humanities and Social Science Fund of Jiangxi (JJ1420).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dong-hyun Oh.

Appendix: Estimating the trade-off factor

Appendix: Estimating the trade-off factor

The trade-off factor is the slope of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC). The estimation model is as follows:

$$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{per} {\mathrm{CO}_{2}}_{it} =\beta _0 +\beta _1 \mathrm{per}\mathrm{GDP}_{it} +\beta _2 \mathrm{per}\mathrm{GDP}_{it} ^{2}+\varepsilon _{it}, \end{aligned}$$
(10)

where per\(\hbox {CO}_{2}\) is per capita \(\hbox {CO}_{2}\) emission (unit: kg \(\hbox {CO}_{2}\) per person); perGDP is per capita GDP (unit: RMB per person); \(i\) and \(t\) represent region and time, respectively. Since our sample is balanced panel data, the first step to estimation is to select a suitable estimation model for panel data regression. The Hausman test result signifies that the fixed effects model is superior to the random effects model (test statistics 218.9, degrees of freedom 2, critical value at the 1 % significance level 9.21). The fixed effects model estimation result is listed in Table 10, where the within estimator is used in estimating the fixed effects model.

Table 10 Estimation results of environmental Kuznets curve

The estimated parameter \({\hat{\beta }}_1\) and \({\hat{\beta }}_2\) is used for calculating trade-off factor of region \(i\) at time \(t\), \(\beta _{it}\), as follows:

$$\begin{aligned} \beta _{it} =\frac{\partial \mathrm{per}{\mathrm{CO}_{2}}_{it}}{\partial \mathrm{perGDP}}=\hat{{\beta }}_1 +2\hat{{\beta }}_2 \mathrm{perGDP}_{it} \end{aligned}$$
(11)

Since \(\mathrm{perGDP}_{it}\) in Eq. (11) is different across region and over time, the trade-off factor varies across region and over time.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choi, Y., Oh, Dh. & Zhang, N. Environmentally sensitive productivity growth and its decompositions in China: a metafrontier Malmquist–Luenberger productivity index approach. Empir Econ 49, 1017–1043 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-014-0896-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-014-0896-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation