Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Trade openness and green total factor productivity: testing the role of environment regulation based on dynamic panel threshold model

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As an ecological barrier to ensure the high-quality development of China’s economy, the Yangtze River Economic Belt has attracted more and more attention from academic circles on how to promote the green development of the Yangtze River Economic Belt. This paper uses the SBM directional distance function and the Malmquist–Luenberger index to measure the green total factor productivity of 110 cities in the Yangtze River Economic Belt from 2006 to 2018, and then based on the panel threshold model to empirically explore the intensity of environmental regulations that induce trade openness and promote green total factor productivity. Studies have shown that: Firstly, trade openness has significantly inhibited the increase in green total factor productivity, but environmental regulations can play a positive regulatory role, that is increasing the intensity of environmental regulation can alleviate the adverse effects of trade openness, and it is mainly to improve the adverse effects by promoting the progress of green technology. Secondly, the results of the panel threshold model show that environmental regulations have a nonlinear regulatory effect on trade openness and green total factor productivity. When the intensity of environmental regulations crosses the second threshold, trade openness has a significant positive effect on the impact of green total factor productivity. Finally, the heterogeneity results show that in order to reverse the adverse impact of trade openness on green total factor productivity, the upper, middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River Economic Belt should formulate relatively strict environmental regulations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ayamba, E. C., Haibo, C., Musah, A. A., Ruth, A., & Osei-Agyemang, A. (2019). An empirical model on the impact of foreign direct investment on China’s environmental pollution: Analysis based on simultaneous equations. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26(16), 16239–16248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E., Clarke, L., & Shittu, E. (2008). Technical change and the marginal cost of abatement. Energy Economics, 30(6), 2799–2816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botev, J., Égert, B., & Jawadi, F. (2019). The nonlinear relationship between economic growth and financial development: Evidence from developing, emerging and advanced economies. International Economics 160: 3–13.

  • Cai, X., Lu, Y., Wu, M., & Yu, L. (2016). Does environmental regulation drive away inbound foreign direct investment? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China. Journal of Development Economics, 123(8), 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, B., & Wang, S. (2017). Opening up, international trade, and green technology progress. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142(2), 1002–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2016). China’s industrial green total factor productivity and its determinants—An empirical study based on ml index and dynamic panel data model. Statal Research.

  • Chung, Y. H., Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management 51(3): 229–240.

  • Du, W., & Li, M. (2020). Influence of environmental regulation on promoting the low-carbon transformation of China’s foreign trade: Based on the dual margin of export enterprise. Journal of Cleaner Production 244: 118687.

  • Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2010). Directional distance functions and slacks-based measures of efficiency: Some clarifications. European Journal of Operational Research, 206(3), 702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, H., & Weber, W. L. (2010). A directional slacks-based measure of technical inefficiency. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 43(4), 274–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1), 83–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, B. E. (1999). Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference. Journal of Econometrics, 93(2), 345–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, J., Wang, Z., Lian, Y., & Huang, Q. (2018). Environmental regulation, foreign direct investment and green technological progress—Evidence from Chinese manufacturing industries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(2), 221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, J., Wang, Z., Huang, Q., & Zhang, X. (2019). Environmental regulation intensity, foreign direct investment, and green technology spillover—An empirical study. Sustainability, 11(10), 2718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwa, B., Sr, F., Gy, A., et al. (2020). Does China’s outward direct investment improve green total factor productivity in the “Belt and Road” countries? Evidence from dynamic threshold panel model analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 275.

  • Jin, W., Zhang, H., Liu, S., et al. (2019). Technological innovation, environmental regulation, and green total factor efficiency of industrial water resources. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, 61–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremer, S., Bick, A., & Nautz, D. (2013). Inflation and growth: New evidence from a dynamic panel threshold analysis. Empirical Economics, 44(2), 861–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., Lu, Y., & Huang, R. (2021). Whether foreign direct investment can promote high-quality economic development under environmental regulation: Evidence from the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 28(17): 21674–21683.

  • Li, K., Zhou, Y., Xiao, H., Li, Z., & Shan, Y. (2021). Decoupling of economic growth from CO2 emissions in Yangtze River Economic Belt cities. Science of the Total Environment 775: 145927.

  • Lin, B., & Chen, Z. (2018). Does factor market distortion inhibit the green total factor productivity in China? Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J., & Xie, J. (2020). Environmental regulation, technological innovation, and export competitiveness: An empirical study based on China’s manufacturing industry. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17(4): 1427.

  • Luo, Q., Zhou, J., Li, Z., & Yu, B. (2020). Spatial differences of ecosystem services and their driving factors: A comparation analysis among three urban agglomerations in China’s Yangtze River Economic Belt. Science of The Total Environment 725: 138452.

  • Millimet, D. L., & Roy, J. (2016). Empirical tests of the pollution haven hypothesis when environmental regulation is endogenous. Journal of Applied Econometrics 31(4): 652–677.

  • Outhwaite, O., Black, R., & Laycock, A. (2010). The pursuit of grounded theory in agricultural and environmental regulation: A suggested approach to empirical legal study in biosecurity. Law & Policy, 29(4), 493–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, Y., Chen, Z., Xu, J., & Lee, J. (2020). Analysis of green total factor productivity trend and its determinants for the countries along silk roads. Growth and Change, 51(4), 1711–1726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, S., Wang, Z., & Geng, S. (2021). How do environmental regulation and foreign investment behavior affect green productivity growth in the industrial sector? An empirical test based on Chinese provincial panel data. Journal of Environmental Management 287: 112282.

  • Rusiawan, W., Tjiptoherijanto, P., Suganda, E., et al. (2015). Assessment of green total factor productivity impact on sustainable indonesia productivity growth. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 28, 493–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2016). Dynamic panels with threshold effect and endogeneity. Journal of Econometrics, 195(2), 169–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (2002). A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 143(1), 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (2003). Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA: A slacks-based measure (SBM) approach. GRIPS Research Report Series, 2003, 44–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., & Shen, N. (2016). Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: The case of China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 62(9): 758–766.

  • Wang, Y., Sun, X., & Guo, X. (2019). Environmental regulation and green productivity growth: Empirical evidence on the Porter Hypothesis from OECD industrial sectors. Energy Policy 132(9).

  • Wang, H., Cui, H., & Zhao, Q. (2021). Effect of green technology innovation on green total factor productivity in China: Evidence from spatial durbin model analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 288: 125624.

  • Wei, D., Wu, F., Yang, W., & Chonsun, B. (2018). Pattern of opening up, integration and reshaping economic geography—A new economic geography analysis of the belt and road initiative and the Yangtze River economic belt. Contemporary Social Sciences, 13(05), 45–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, H., Heshmati, A., et al. (2017). Do environmental regulations effect FDI decisions? The pollution haven hypothesis revisited. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 7, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., & Wei, T. (2016). Study on the green total factor productivity in main cities of China. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 34(1), 215–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, S., & Ye, A. (2018). Does foreign direct investment improve inclusive green growth? Empirical evidence from China. Economies, 6(3), 44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the Key (bidding) Project of Central Universities in Southwest University (SWU2009220) and Major Project of National Social Science Fund (20&ZD156).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Economics & Management, Southwest University, Chongqing, 400715, China

    Qinghua Huang & Min Liu

Authors
  1. Qinghua Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Min Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ML and QH conceived and designed the research question. ML constructed the models, analyzed the optimal solutions and wrote the paper. QH reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Min Liu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. There is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of, the manuscript entitled.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, Q., Liu, M. Trade openness and green total factor productivity: testing the role of environment regulation based on dynamic panel threshold model. Environ Dev Sustain 24, 9304–9329 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01825-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01825-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation