Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eiar

A comprehensive assessment of the performance of China’s provincial

zero-waste cities and impact factor diagnosis
Yishi Han a, Junli Liu c, He Xu a, b, *
a
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China
b
Institute of Ecological Civilization, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China
c
Institute for Resources, Environmental and Ecology, Tianjin Academy of Social Sciences, Tianjin 300191, people’s Republic of China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The large disparities in resource endowment and economic development in different regions have caused large
Zero-waste cities differences in promoting zero-waste (ZW) cities. This study comprehensively considers the whole life cycle chain
TOPSIS–entropy weight of solid waste and the guarantee mechanism for promoting the development of ZW cities, and constructs an index
Spatial disparities
system from four dimensions: solid waste reduction at the source, solid waste resource utilization, solid waste
Influencing factors
China
final disposal, and development of security capacity. Furthermore, it adopts the TOPSIS–entropy weight method
to evaluate the development status of ZW cities in 31 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities under
the Central Government of China from 2010 to 2019 (Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan were excluded due to lack
of data). The results show an upward trend of ZW levels in twenty-five provinces; a downward trend in four
provinces, namely, Fujian, Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning; and a roughly f lat trend in two provinces, namely
Henan, and Ningxia. Yunnan, Gansu, and Guizhou provinces have the most significant improvement in the ZW
levels. Meanwhile, the eastern region has the highest ZW level, followed by the central and western regions.
Combined with Geographic Information System (GIS), the solid waste management capacity of each region was
analysed on the basis of the aforementioned four dimensions. Spatial differences were determined in the solid
waste management characteristics of different regions. In terms of source reduction, the central and a few
western regions have the best performance. Furthermore, the final disposal in the north is higher than that in the
south, and the resourcefulness and development of security capacity show a clear decreasing trend from the east
to west. Using a multiple linear regression analysis model, we analysed the potential factors affecting the ZW
level of each region from four aspects: economy, technology, resource endowment, and education. The results
indicated significant differences in the role of the same type of index in the ZW levels in each region. This paper
assessed the performance of China’s ZW cities from both temporal and spatial perspectives, and the relevant
influencing factors were further examined. It can provide a theoretical support and decision-making basis for
China to improve ZW level further, narrow down the regional gaps, and implement green development and high-
quality economic transformation, with important theoretical and practical values.

1. Introduction
The theme of human development in the 21st century is green
development (Wang, 2021). Solid waste pollution is a major obstacle in
promoting green development and is becoming a worldwide environ­
mental problem. Kanhai et al. (2021) found a strong relationship be­
tween human health and complete solid waste management systems.
They specified that improper systems could lead to soil and water
contamination, which can spread various diseases. With economic
growth and rapid urbanization, municipal solid waste (MSW) produc­
tion is proliferating. Farzadkia et al. (2021) also argued that poorly
designed MSW management systems can lead to environmental pollu­
tion (e.g., air, water, and soil) and will generate significant greenhouse
gas emissions, which will harm human health and global climate
change. However, criminal cases of illegal dumping of solid waste and
environmental pollution have emerged in recent years, particularly in
Asia, where solid waste pollution is most evident due to the lack of
relevant policy constraints (Ma et al., 2020). On the one hand, solid

* Corresponding author at: College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, No. 38 Tongyan Road, Haihe Education Park, Jinnan District,
Tianjin 300350, China.
E-mail address: seacenter@nankai.edu.cn (H. Xu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106778
Received 9 January 2022; Received in revised form 7 March 2022; Accepted 10 March 2022
Available online 26 March 2022
0195-9255/© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Y. Han et al.
waste can cause serious problems such as environmental pollution and
waste of resources. On the other hand, solid waste contains a large
amount of useful recyclable resources, and thus, a large amount of en­
ergy and raw materials could be saved if recycled. Moreover, suitable
recycling processes have a significant impact on alleviating the resource
dilemma (Yang, 2019). Therefore, recycling is a fundamental solution to
the problem of solid waste pollution (Abdel-Shafy and Mansour, 2018).
The zero-waste (ZW) concept is a highly promising idea for imple­
menting recycling development (Wen, 2020). From generation to final
disposal of solid waste, this series of processes involve multiple
responsible parties, such as producers, consumers, recyclers, and dis­
posers (Xiu, 2017), and their non-cooperation will affect the operation
of the whole integrated solid waste management system. However, in
the actual issue, most of the environmental pollution and resource
wastage due to solid waste fall within the scope of public governance.
Thus, most individuals would choose to avoid or ignore those problems
due to their interests from the perspective of economic interests and
society, making it impractical to rely on individuals to solve the solid
waste problem (Xue, 2020). The core concept of ZW is to build a com­
plete solid waste recycling system by mobilizing all the forces of society,
thereby continuously promoting the formation of a green development
and lifestyle. Finally, a society is established that generates the least
amount of solid waste at source, fully recycles resources, minimizes the
amount of landfill, and achieves multiple wins in terms of environ­
mental, economic, and social benefits (Liu et al., 2019). Therefore, the
promotion of the ZW concepts plays a crucial role in addressing the solid
waste problem at its source.
Since Palmer first coined the term “zero waste” in 1973, the “ZW
city” concept has evolved into a new type of waste management concept
(Zaman and Lehmann, 2013). In 1995, Canberra, Australia’s capital,
became the first city to introduce a ZW management goal (Snow and
Julie, 2003). Subsequently, the first ZW city emerged in North America
and Europe, mostly driven by local waste reduction targets and related
policies. For example, in 2000, Del Norte County, California became the
first region in the United States to implement a ZW program, and in
2001, the California Integrated Waste Management Board adopted the
ZW goal as a strategic waste management plan (Connett, 2013).
Meanwhile, New Zealand established the New Zealand Zero Waste Fund
in 1997 (Tennant-Wood, 2003). Moreover, Seattle, USA, adopted ZW as
a core disposal principle for solid waste in 1998 (Zaman, 2015). The
EU’s 2005 Waste Framework Directive sets a target of “recycling 50% of
municipal waste and 70% of construction waste by 2020,” which pro­
vides the basis for member states to develop waste management policies
and targets (Zheng et al., 2021). The concept of ZW is also increasingly
being applied to regional and national solid waste management policies.
For example, the European Commission (2014) proposed a “zero waste
Europe” for a circular economy, the UK developed a ZW solid waste
management plan (DEFRA, 2011), and the The US Conference of Mayors
(n.d.) adopted a resolution calling for cities to adopt ZW principles to
advance sustainable solid waste management. With the spread of the ZW
concepts and the successful demonstration of pioneering cities, inter­
national initiatives and promotion of ZW cities have intensified, further
contributing to the spread of ZW concept (Zheng et al., 2021). Inter­
national Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) with ZW promotion
as their main objective, such as ZWIA (2018) and ‘Waste-wise cities
campaign’ by UN-Habitat (2018).
The domestic economy in China has been in a state of rapid devel­
opment since 1978, with the gross domestic product (GDP) growing
from RMB 365 billion in 1978 to RMB 114,367 billion in 2021. Despite
the continuous improvement in people’s living standards, rapid eco­
nomic development has inevitably led to several environmental pollu­
tion and resource shortage problems. The economic model must be
changed for sustainable development (Yu, 2014). According to the Na­
tional Bureau of Statistics, China’s urbanization rate exceeded 60% by
2019 and is expected to reach 71.2% by 2050, with China’s urbanization
entering a critical stage, accompanied by many problems, such as an
2
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778
increase in municipal solid waste (MSW), construction and industrial
waste, and medical hazardous waste (Shi, 2020). Simultaneously, as a
large industrial country, China has become the second-largest economy
in the world in just a few decades from being behind the world in all
aspects. The rapid development is inseparable from the brutal produc­
tion and consumption patterns (Liu et al., 2019). Therefore, solid waste
legacy and pollution have become difficult problems in China’s indus­
trialization and urbanization. According to statistics, more than 10
billion tons of solid waste are added to China each year, with a total
historical stockpile of 60–70 billion tons. Some outstanding problems
that waste resources and damage the environment include the intensity
of various types of solid waste generation, difficulty in selecting sites for
treatment facilities, low degree of resource usage, low proportion of
collaborative treatment, illegal transfer, and dumping incidents. These
problems affect the safe operation and sustainable development of cities
and need to be solved by deepening reform (Zhang, 2019).
In 2017, a number of academicians from the Chinese Academy of
Engineering, together with experts, submitted academician proposals to
the State Council, proposing the concept of “ZW society” and “ZW city”,
which was highly valued by the Central Commission for Deep Reform. In
December 2018, the General Office of the State Council issued the ZW
City construction pilot work program, formally proposed to carry out the
ZW city construction pilot (Ma, 2022). The Ministry of Ecology and
Environment of the People’s Republic of China finalized the “11 + 5”
pilot areas (11 prefecture-level cities and five special situation areas.) by
screening cities and regions with different development directions,
stages and foundations. Good results have been achieved in pilots due to
decades of experience abroad and the attention governments have
attached to environmental protection in recent years. For example, as
one of the first ZW pilots in China, Xuzhou has subdivided food waste
into household food waste, kitchen waste and other waste in order to
realize the “four classifications” (sorting, collecting, transporting and
disposing of food waste). It has promoted the integration of kitchen
waste and other food waste collection, transportation and treatment,
and the harmless treatment rate of kitchen waste in urban areas has
reached over 99% (Li, 2021). As the concept of ZW in China gradually
deepens, ZW agriculture is also became an important part of ZW city
construction. As the capital city of Qinghai, Xining is also the first ZW
pilot in the western region. According to its unique geographical con­
ditions and resources, Xining has combined the construction of “ZW
agriculture” with rural revitalization and comprehensive improvement
of rural habitat, actively build an eco-friendly modern industrial system,
providing experience for the high-quality construction of ZW cities in
the western region (Yang, 2021). Shanghai, as a developed city in the
eastern coastal region, is also a pioneer in China’s ZW exploration. In the
context of China’s “double carbon” target, Shanghai has studied various
policies to deal with climate change, and has proposed the path of “five
categories” (general industrial solid waste, agricultural waste, domestic
waste, construction waste and hazardous waste), “four systems” (insti­
tution, technology, market and supervision) and “three lists” (re­
sponsibility list, task list and project list)” as the general idea of the
Shanghai ZW city construction and carbon emission reduction syner­
gistic promotion path (Ma, 2022).
However, the construction of ZW cities in China is still in initial
stage, while due to China’s vast geography, the large disparities in
resource endowment and economic development in different regions
have caused large differences in promoting ZW cities. In order to analyze
the level of construction of ZW cities in each region and to identify the
weaknesses of the construction process, a systematic evaluation of the
process is therefore needed.
Foreign evaluations of solid waste disposal performance have
focussed on material flow analysis and life cycle analysis. For instance,
Cifrian et al. (2010) combined solid waste disposal with economic effi­
ciency to assess the level of solid waste disposal in the Cantabria (Spain)
by analyzing the value of MSW (glass, paper, etc.) and special solid
waste (construction, rubber, municipal sludge, etc.). Meanwhile, Wilson
Y. Han et al.
et al. (2012) used the integrated sustainable waste management “lens”
to analyze the current status of solid waste disposal in 20 municipalities
across six continents, including the composition of solid waste, types of
solid waste, public health collection coverage, environment and
disposal, and resource management. Zaman and Lehmann (2013) used
the ZW Index to analyze Adelaide, San Francisco, and Stockholm to
predict the amount of virgin materials, energy, water, and greenhouse
gas emissions that would be replaced by resources recovered from the
waste stream in these three cities. Sahimaa et al. (2017) illustrated the
effectiveness of three indexes—greenhouse gas emissions, material loss,
and ecological footprint—in measuring the sustainable disposal of solid
waste in Finland, using the Finnish Sustainable Communities Network
Programme as an example. Meanwhile, ElSaid and Aghezzaf (2017)
assessed the level of solid waste disposal in Cairo and Brussels in terms of
the components of an integrated solid waste management system(i.e..,
collection and sorting, recycling, composting, energy recovery, and
landfills). Olay-Romero et al. (2020) assessed the performance of solid
waste disposal in Mexico regarding the technical aspects of road
cleaning, waste collection, and disposal. Ríos and Picazo-Tadeo (2021)
monitored the ZW level in the EU-28 by the ratio between the composite
index of waste disposed of environmentally compliant operations
(recycling and recovery) and the composite index of waste disposed of
non-environmentally compliant operations (landfill and incineration),
combined with data envelopment analysis (DEA) techniques. Mean­
while, Feng et al. (2021) assessed the solid waste management capacity
of coastal and marine cities in Vietnam in terms of six dimensions:
finance and expenditure, tourism activities, policy and legal framework,
environmental co-creation, stakeholder participation and community
awareness. Cordova-Pizarro et al. (2019) assessed Mexico’s e-waste
management system by using the circular economy (CE) model. More­
over, Pais-Magalhães et al. (2020) measured the waste management
efficiency through greenhouse gas emissions in 15 European countries
using DEA techniques. Muller et al. (2021) analyzed different MSW
treatment options in the city of Juazeiro do Norte, Ceará, Brazil, by
evaluating economic, environmental, social, technical, and regulatory
criteria.
In China, the evaluation of ZW levels is also based on quantitative
studies. Wen et al. (2020) used the TOPSIS–entropy weight method to
analyse ZW level of 31 provinces in China and compared time and space
and analysed the potential factors affecting the ZW level in China. Yang
et al. (2021) used the entropy weight method to evaluate the ZW level in
Shanxi Province and provided relevant suggestions for promoting ZW in
Shanxi considering international experience. Gu et al. (2021) assessed
the recyclable waste recycling potential (RWRP) of Suzhou, Yangzhou,
and Suqian and analysed the impact of economic development, urban
population, consumption preferences, local customs and culture, and
residents’ lifestyle on the RWRP of each province. Lu et al. (2020) used
GIS, spatial analysis models and DEA models to evaluate the efficiency
performance of the circular economy in 30 provinces, autonomous re­
gions and municipalities in China from both input and output perspec­
tives. Then they used Tobit regression models to analyse the factors
influencing the performance of the circular economy in China. Kuo and
Chang (2021) used an empirical model to analyze the circular economy
performance of 37,68 enterprises in China over the period 2011–2020
and obtained the potential factors influencing the circular economy of
enterprises through linear regression analysis. Zhang et al. (2021)
compared MSW disposal performance in Shenzhen and Tianjin, and
estimated residents’ intention to separate waste through attitude-
behavior-condition theory. Meanwhile, Tang et al. (2020) used a com­
bination of global entropy and coefficients of variation methods to
analyze the performance of provincial industrial resource reuse and
solid waste treatment in China during the 11th and 12th Five-Year Plans
in both time and space.
Previous efforts have evaluated the level of solid waste disposal in a
country or region in both time and space by constructing an index sys­
tem. However, in the process of diagnosing the influencing factors, the
3
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778
analysis is often made only for the country or region as a whole. How­
ever, due to the large differences in economic level or resource
endowment between countries or regions, the same influencing factors
may have different impacts on the level of solid waste disposal in
different regions. Therefore, this study assesses the ZW level of 31
provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the
central government in China, a diagnostic index system of influencing
factors was constructed according to the different resource endowment
characteristics of the three major regions (East, West, and Central), and
the influence of various indices on the ZW level of different regions was
analysed.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. The second part is about
data and methods, the index system of ZW-level performance evaluation
and the influencing factors are constructed. The third part is the results
and analysis, mainly including the evaluation of the ZW level in China,
the spatial analysis and the influencing factors. The fourth part is the
conclusion of this study and some relevant recommendations. Fig. 1
presents the method flowchart.
2. Methodology
Two methods were used in this study. The TOPSIS–entropy weight­
ing method and the multiple linear regression analysis model. The data
sources for this study are China Statistical Yearbook (2011–2020), China
Environmental Statistical Yearbook (2011–2020), and China Energy
Statistical Yearbook (2011-2020). The agricultural solid waste index
was chosen to be evaluated for one year only in 2019 due to a lack of
early data. The software and models used include Excel, SPSS 16.0, and
ArcGIS 10.2.
2.1. TOPSIS–entropy method
The TOPSIS–entropy weighting method is a commonly used within-
group comprehensive evaluation method that can fully use the raw data
information, and its results can accurately reflect the gap between cases.
Using the raw data matrix based on normalization, we used the cosine
method to identify the best and worst solutions among a limited number
of solutions. Then the distance between each evaluation objects was
calculated separately to obtain the relative proximity of each evaluation
object to the best solution as a basis for evaluating the merits (Chen and
Xia, 2007). As this study contains both positive and negative index and
has multiple evaluation objects. Using the TOPSIS–entropy weighting
method to evaluate the ZW level in China, which is consistent with the
scope of application of the method, is reasonable.
The TOPSIS–entropy method calculation process is as follows.
a. Standardization: rij(positive) = Xjmax
xij − xjmin xjmax − xij
− Xjmin rij(negative) = Xjmax − Xjmin.
∑ m
b. Normalization: pij = rij/ i=1 rij
∑
c. Index weight: ej = − k i=1m pij ⋅ ln pij where k = 1/ln(m).
d. Entropy weight of the j-th indicator Wj: wj = (1 − ej)/
∑ n
j=1 (1 − ej)
e. Score for each indicator: AP = (APij), APij = wj × pij
f: Positive and negative ideal solutions for each indicator:
IS+ = maxi∈m (APi1 , APi2 ,…, APin′ )
( ′ )
IS− = mini∈m APi1 , APi2 ,…, APin
g: Positive and negative ideal solution distances for each sample:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
D+
i
∑n′ ( )2
= j=1
APij − IS+
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
D−i ∑n′ ( )2
= APij − IS−
j=1
h: The relative proximity of the sample to the positive ideal solution,
in the sense of this paper, is the solid waste management performance of
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Fig. 1. Flowchart of the method.

each province:
D−i
RCi =
D+ −
i + Di
In 2019, China formulated the Zero-waste City construction index
system (for trial implementation) (Ministry of Ecology and Environment of
the People’s Republic of China, 2019), which takes solid waste reduction
and resource utilization as the core, and evaluates the ZW level of each
pilot city in five aspects: solid waste reduction at source, resource uti­
lization, final disposal, security capacity, and the public’s sense of ac­
cess. In 2021, in order to promote the construction of ZW cities during
the 14th Five-Year Plan period, promote cities to significantly reduce the
amount of solid waste generated, stimulate the comprehensive utiliza­
tion of solid waste, reduce the harmfulness of solid waste, minimize the
amount of solid waste landfilled, and steadily improve the solid waste
management system and management capacity, the Zero-waste City
Construction Index System (2021 Edition)(Ministry of Ecology and Envi­
ronment of the People’s Republic of China, 2021b) was formulated. It
mainly covers the reduction, resourcefulness and harmlessness of solid
waste in the industrial, agricultural, construction and household sectors,
as well as the system, market, technology, regulatory system construc­
tion and public access to 18 aspects, a total of 60 index. Among them, 24

4
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

mandatory index and 36 optional index. number of patent applications, R&D internal funding expenditure,
Based on the two index systems of China and combining the whole number of high-tech product development projects, percentage of pop­
life cycle chain of solid waste and the guarantee mechanism for pro­ ulation with university education or above, and investment in education
moting the development of ZW cities, this study constructs an evaluation can best reflect the economic, technological, and educational level of a
index system of the ZW level from four dimensions, solid waste reduc­ region. Investment in industrial pollution control can reflect the envi­
tion at the source, solid waste resource utilization, solid waste final ronmental attention in a region. In the resource endowment category,
disposal and development of security capacity (Table 1). the higher population, the higher amount of solid waste generated, so
there is a direct relationship between population density and ZW level.
The industrial composition of the eastern region is mainly tertiary in­
2.2. Multiple linear regression analysis model
dustry, and the industrial composition is inseparable from the genera­
tion and disposal of solid waste. Thus, the percentage of tertiary industry
Multiple linear regression explains changes in the dependent vari­
is taken as the influencing factor of the ZW level in the eastern region.
able through one main influencing factor as the independent variable. In
The central and western regions are rich in coal mine, and the industrial
the study of actual problems, changes in the dependent variable are
composition is mainly secondary industry. So the percentage of sec­
often influenced by several important factors, two or more influencing
ondary industry and coal mining generation are taken as the factors
factors need to be used as the independent variable to explain changes in
influencing the ZW level in the central and western regions.
the dependent variable, which is called multiple regression. Multiple
The regression model was constructed as follows.
linear regression has multiple variables and is based on the principle of
finding the best linear combination of independent variables to fit the y = β0 + β1 x1 + ⋯ + βp xp + ε
dependent variable. The method has many advantages; it is by far the
most commonly used method for modeling data, applies to almost any where β0 is the intercept term, β1，β2…βn are the partial regression
data, and demonstrates the strength of the relationship between the coefficient, ε is the residual, y is the ZW level in each province, and x1，
individual independent and dependent variables. As this study involves x2...xn are the impact factors in Table 2.
multiple categories of influencing factors, the strength of the correlation
between the various factors is uncertain and the positive and negative 3. Results and analysis
aspects. It is in line with the scope of application of the method.
Previous studies (Lu et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2019; Huang et al., 3.1. Analysis of zero waste level in China
2020; Lu and Yuan, 2017; Wen et al., 2020) concluded that economic,
technology, and resource endowments are significantly correlated with 3.1.1. Zero waste level in China
green development, recycling, and solid waste disposal capacity. In the After the TOPSIS–entropy weighting method was used to calculate
introduction, it is mentioned that green development and recycling are the composite score of ZW cities in each province, ArcGIS 10.2 was used
complementary to the construction of ZW cities. In the Notice on the to map the spatial distribution of ZW levels in each province. This study
Public Consultation on the Work Plan for Promoting the Construction of chose to analyze the ZW levels for 2010, 2013, 2017, and 2019 (other
Zero-waste Cities in the 14th Five-Year Plan Period (Draft for Comments) data are presented in the appendix). The spatial distribution map (Fig. 2)
(Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China, shows that regions with a higher colour bias toward warmer shades (red)
2021a), the importance of publicity and education has been emphasized, have higher ZW levels and regions with a lower bias toward cooler
while the education-based index were included in the evaluation index shades (green) have lower ZW levels. It can be seen that the regions with
system by several pilot cities. Therefore, this paper constructs the high ZW levels are mainly concentrated in the eastern coastal regions,
diagnostic index system of influencing factors from four aspects: econ­ while the regions with low ZW levels are mainly concentrated in the
omy, technology, resource endowment and education. GDP per capita, western inland regions, and the overall ZW level in 2017 was highest
(with a higher proportion of warm colour).
Table 1 At the national level, China’s ZW level showed a wave-like upward
Zero-waste city evaluation index systems. trend from 2010 to 2019, from 0.3146 in 2010 to 0.3807 in 2019
(Fig. 3). Between 2010 and 2017, China continued to boost investment
Types of Index NO. Index layer
in environmental pollution control, which effectively improved the
I1 Industrial solid waste generation intensity
Solid waste reduction at effectiveness of solid waste treatment and disposal, leaving the national
I2 Daily domestic waste generation per capita
source
I3 Hazardous waste generation intensity ZW level on the rise in these years and reaching a peak of 0.4134 in
Integrated utilization rate of general industrial 2017. However, in 2018, the increase rate of most types of industrial
I4
solid waste products peaked (Fig. 4). The solid waste disposal system was already
Integrated utilization rate of industrial hazardous overloaded, which could hardly continue to sustain the output of large
I5
Solid waste resource waste
utilization I6 Harmless rate of domestic waste
I7 Integrated utilization rate of straw
I8 Integrated utilization rate of livestock manure Table 2
I9 Recycling rate of agricultural film Selection of influencing factors.
Rate of reduction in general industrial solid waste
I10 Type NO. Index layer
storage and disposal
Reduction rate of industrial hazardous waste to I1 GDP per capita
I11 Economy
Solid waste final landfill I2 Investment in industrial pollution control
disposal I12 Sludge disposal rate I3 Number of patent applications
I13 Number of public toilets per 10,000 people Technology I4 R&D internal funding expenditure
Decrease in sanitary landfill volume of domestic I5 Number of High-tech Product Development Projects
I14
waste Percentage of population with university education or
I6
Total number of vehicles and equipment Quality Education above
I15
dedicated to amenities and sanitation I7 Investment in education
I16 Harmless treatment capacity I8 Population density
Development of security
Percentage of employed persons in Percentage of Secondary industry (Central and
capacity I17 Resource I9
environmental system Western)
endowment
Total investment in environmental pollution I10 Coal generation (Central, West)
I18
control I11 Percentage of Tertiary sector (East)

5
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Fig. 2. Spatial distribution of ZW levels in China in 2010, 2013, 2017, and 2019.

0.44

0.4134
0.42

0.40
0.3807
ZW level

0.3723 0.3746
0.38
0.3642
0.3596
0.36
0.3450

0.34 0.3298

0.3146 0.3161
0.32

0.30
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Fig. 3. Changes in ZW levels in China.

6
Y. Han et al.
12.0%
8.0%
4.0%
0.0%
2015 2016
-4.0%
-8.0%
Increase in cement production over the previous year
-12.0% Increase in pig iron production over the previous year
Increase in crude steel production over the previous year
Increase in steel production over the previous year
Fig. 4. Rate of increase in various industrial products.
amounts of industrial solid waste. This had fully exposed the long-
standing solid waste stockpiles problems, leading to a decline in ZW
levels. However, after the implementation of the ZW city policy in early
2019, China’s ZW level was significantly improved.
3.1.2. Zero waste level in regions (East, Central, and West)
This study divides China’s 31 provincial administrative regions into
three major regions, including the eastern, middle, and western regions
(Table 3).
In 2010–2019, ZW level was higher in the Eastern region and
significantly higher than the national level. In the central region, ZW
level was in an intermediate position and similar to the national level. In
the western region, ZW level was the lowest and significantly lower than
the national level. Changes in ZW levels in the three regions were similar
to national changes, all on wave-like upward trend between 2010 and
2017, with a brief decline in 2018, finally turning upward again in 2019
(Fig. 5).
After the inclusion of the agricultural solid waste-related index in
2019, the ZW level declined slightly in all regions, most notably in the
central region (Fig. 6). The construction of ZW cities is about the
treatment and disposal of industrial solid waste and domestic solid waste
and agricultural solid waste, which cannot be ignored. In the 14th Five-
Year Plan period, China should pay more attention to agricultural solid
waste and improve their utilization rate.
To provide an in-depth analysis of the actual development status of
different regions, this section analysed the intrinsic reasons affecting the
ZW levels in each region from the spatial layout of four solid waste
managements: source reduction, resourcefulness, final disposal, and
development of security capacity. Using ArcGIS, this study borrows the
natural interruption point grading method to classify the average of the
ZW city management process scores of each province, autonomous re­
gion and municipality directly under the Central Government into five
levels from 2010 to 2019. Red is a high level, orange is a high-medium
level, yellow is a medium level, green is a medium-low level, and dark
green is a low level. This allows for a more intuitive comparison of the
Table 3
The division of three major regions, including the east, middle, and west regions.
Region Province, Autonomous Region, and Municipality
Eastern Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang,
region Fujian, Shandong, Guangdong, Hainan
Middle
Shanxi, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Anhui, Jiangxi, Henan, Hubei, Hunan
region
Western Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, Chongqing, Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan,
region Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia, Xinjiang, Tibet
7
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778
2017 2018 2019
differences between the various management processes in the develop­
ment of ZW cities in China’s provinces.
In source reduction, three of the provinces with high levels (Henan,
Anhui, and Jiangxi) are located in the central region. The remaining
provinces with high-medium development levels are also mostly located
in the central and western regions, with a few in the eastern region. In
resourcefulness, the provinces with high and high-medium levels are
mainly in the eastern and central regions. The developed coastal prov­
inces, such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, have all reached high
levels, whereas the western inland regions are almost all at medium-low
and low levels. In the final disposal, the north levels significantly higher
than the south. The provinces rich in mineral resources such as Gansu,
Anhui, Jiangxi, and Guangxi, all at low levels. The developed coastal
provinces such as Beijing, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai are at high
and high-medium levels. In the development of security capacity, the
levels show a clear decreasing trend from the east to west. It can be seen
that the vast majority of developed eastern coastal provinces, such as
Beijing, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, are at high or
high-medium levels. By contrast most of the provinces in the western
region, which are relatively backward in economic development, are
located at medium-low and low levels (Fig. 7).
In general, the difference in the levels of economic development
between the east, the middle and the west largely determine the
decreasing trend of ZW levels in China from the east to west. Due to its
economic advantages, the eastern region can convert input resources
into an output with high efficiency, achieving a high match between
“input and output,” and leading the country in resourcefulness, final
disposal and development of security capacity. However, the process of
economic development and high output will inevitably generate a large
amount of solid waste, resulting in a relatively low level for a source
reduction in the eastern region. The central and western regions, which
lack economic support, levels higher in source reduction due to rela­
tively low socio-economic activities and solid waste output. On the other
hand, resourcefulness, final disposal and development of security ca­
pacity are also limited due to relatively backward economy or tech­
nology. Especially in the western region, which has the most
underdeveloped economy. There is also a serious lack of infrastructure,
resulting in the western provinces often being at low and medium-low
levels in the above all managements. Notably, Anhui, Jiangxi, and
Guangxi, which are rich in mineral resources, low level in final disposal
because the process of resource extraction can easily lead to the stock­
piling of solid waste.
3.1.3. Zero waste level in provincial districts
At the provincial level, ZW levels were on an upward trend in twenty-
Y. Han et al.
East
0.45
ZW level
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
2010 2011 2012
Fig. 5. Changes in regional ZW level, 2010–2019.
Excluding agricultural solid waste indicators
Indicators with agricultural solid waste
0.6
0.5
ZW level
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
East Central West
Fig. 6. Comparison of regional ZW level after the inclusion of the agricultural
solid waste index in 2019.
five provinces, on a downward trend in four provinces, namely Fujian,
Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning, and on a roughly flat trend in two
provinces, namely Henan and Ningxia. The most significant increases in
ZW levels were seen in Yunnan, Gansu, and Guizhou, with increases of
0.2023, 0.1684, and 0.1633, respectively (Table 5).
In terms of the average ranking of ZW level, Guangdong, Jiangsu,
Beijing, Zhejiang, Shanghai, Shandong, Liaoning, Heilongjiang, Hubei,
and Henan ranked in the top 10 of China in ZW level, and all exceeded
the national average. Jilin, Hebei, Hainan, Ningxia, Inner Mongolia,
Sichuan, Shanxi, Anhui, Shaanxi, and Hunan ranked in the middle 10 of
China, with Jilin, Hebei, and Hainan having ZW level above the national
average. By contrast, the remaining seven cities are below the national
average, with Jilin and Hunan having the highest ZW level (0.3754) and
lowest ZW level (0.3096), respectively. Chongqing, Guangxi, Fujian
Tianjin, Xinjiang, Yunnan, Guizhou, Gansu, Jiangxi, Qinghai, and Tibet
ranked the bottom 11 in the country, with ZW levels below the national
average, and these regions should be given more attention in solid waste
treatment and disposal (Table 4).
In general, the provinces located in coastal region, such as Beijing,
Jiangsu, and Guangdong, are China’s most developed area. More in­
vestment in environmental governance in pursuit of quality develop­
ment, while the higher level of technology and the application of various
new technologies also ensure the good development of ZW city con­
struction. In contrast, the development and technological levels in the
provinces located in western inland region, such as Gansu, Qinghai, and
Tibet are both at a backward level. Further, the ecological environment
of these provinces is relatively fragile and industrial solid waste is easily
deposited, which makes it difficult to provide a guarantee mechanism
for the construction of ZW cities.
3.2. Diagnosis of factors influencing the construction of zero waste cities
Using SPSS 16.0, the descriptive statistics for each region were
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778
Central West National
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
calculated based on the relevant data from 2010 to 2019. To compare
the results of influencing factors on different regions more intuitively,
Table 5 present the results.
(1) Economy
The economic level (GDP per capita) harms ZW level in the eastern
region, but not significantly so in the central and western regions.
Complex relationship exists between economic development and the ZW
level. On the one hand, regions with high economic levels can invest
more in solid waste management and improve the effectiveness of solid
waste resource and harmlessness. On the other hand, rapid economic
development cannot be separated from the rapid expansion of produc­
tion and frequent socio-economic activities, which generates more
waste. China has not yet balanced the relationship between them, and
the various types of solid waste generated in the process of economic
development have not been properly disposed. The contradiction be­
tween economic growth and environmental protection needs to be
resolved. Although China has continued to increase investment in in­
dustrial pollution control in recent years, most of it has been used to
control air and water pollution, with only the central provinces ac­
counting for a relatively high percentage of investment in solid waste
control. Hence, investment in industrial pollution control positively
impacts the ZW level in central regions, while the impact on the eastern
and western regions has not been significant.
(2) Technology
Technology is the endogenous driving force in the resourcefulness
harmlessness of solid waste. The advancement of technology is highly
suitable for developing ZW cities and can meet the requirements of solid
waste reduction and resourcefulness to the greatest extent. The higher
level of technology, the more advanced technologies and products can
be introduced into the ZW fields, accelerating the sustainable manage­
ment of solid waste. Therefore, technology index mostly had a positive
impact on the ZW level in each region.
(3) Resource endowment
The tertiary sector includes scientific research, technical services,
geological exploration, water resources, environment and public facil­
ities management. A higher percentage of the tertiary sector represents a
higher investment in science and technology and environmental
disposal in these areas. So, the percentage of the tertiary sector has
positive impacts on the ZW level in the eastern region. Many provinces
in the central and western regions are rich in coal mining resources,
which generate a large amount of industrial solid waste along with high
industrial output. However, due to technological and economic con­
straints, the central and western regions cannot properly treat the
excessive amount of industrial solid waste, resulting in an increasing
amount of industrial solid waste and hazardous waste stockpiles year on
year. The conflict between coal mining, industrialization and environ­
mental protection is becoming increasingly intense. Thus, the amount of
coal generated has a negative impact on the ZW level in the central and
8
Y. Han et al.
Fig. 7. Spatial layout of solid waste management processes in China.
western regions. The impact of secondary industries on the central and
western regions differs greatly. Although both regions have a high
percentage of industrial output, the central region, which borders some
developed eastern regions, involved in various industries other than
industry. The western region is sparsely populated and closed to traffic,
is more dependent on secondary industries for economic development. It
requires economic development through secondary industries such as
resource and energy extraction to improve related infrastructure de­
ficiencies and achieve sustainable solid waste management. Thus, the
secondary industry positively impacts the ZW level in the western re­
gion, while it has a negative impact on the central region. In recent
years, China’s economy has clearly been shifting toward coastal areas
such as the east and south, with more people choosing to go to these
developed coastal areas. The continuous increase in population brings
more pressure on the amount of solid waste generated in the eastern
region. So the population density harms ZW level in the eastern regions.
The central and western regions, on the other hand, have less population
pressure and do not have a significant impact on ZW levels.
(4) Education
The level of education is closely related to the environmental
awareness of citizens. People with higher education levels are taught to
be more environmentally friendly and have a stronger awareness of
environmental protection in their studies and lives. So the regions with a
higher proportion of educated people will pay more attention to the
environmental governance of their surroundings. Thus, most of the
education-based index positively impacts the ZW level in each region.
9
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778
3.3. Discussion on the results
Some efforts (Lu et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2020; Xiao, 2018) on cir­
cular economy efficiency have reached similar conclusions as this paper.
It is believed that the overall performance develops fastest in the eastern
region, followed by the middle and the western region. Wen et al. (2020)
similarly concluded that the ZW level in the eastern coastal region is
higher than that in the central and western inland regions. Yang et al.
(2021) took Shanxi as the research area and again concluded that ZW
levels are relatively high in developed cities such as Taiyuan. In contrast
to previous studies, a diagnostic index system of influencing factors was
constructed according to the different characteristics of the three major
regions (East, West, and Central), and the factors affecting the ZW levels
in these three regions were analyzed separately. The weaknesses in the
construction process can be make up in a targeted way, which is also one
of the main innovations of this paper.
4. Conclusions
This paper measured and analysed the ZW level of 31 provinces,
autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the central
government in China from 2010 to 2019 using the TOPSIS–entropy
weighting method. Overall, the ZW level in China has been on the rise in
recent years. By region, the eastern region has the highest ZW level,
followed by the central region. Meanwhile, the western region has the
lowest ZW level and is lower than the national level. Under different
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Table 4 the ZW level varied greatly from different regions.

Descriptive statistics of ZW levels by provincial administrative regions. Overall, the ZW level in China is not high, and there is still much
Province ZW level ZW level Changes Average Rank room for improvement. In promoting ZW cities during the 14th Five-
(2010) (2019) value Year Plan period, top-level design should be strengthened to form an
Beijing 0.509 0.5615 0.0525 0.5448 3 environmental infrastructure system that integrates treatment and
Tianjin 0.253 0.3337 0.0807 0.2920 24 disposal facilities and supervision. It can enhance the security capacity
Hebei 0.298 0.3902 0.0922 0.3583 12 of the system and establish a perfect evaluation mechanism for con­
Shanghai 0.5212 0.5532 0.032 0.4906 5 structing ZW cities. In terms of industrial solid waste, the development
Jiangsu 0.5031 0.5549 0.0518 0.5549 2
Zhejiang 0.4672 0.5797 0.1125 0.4954 4
of green industry and the transformation of green lifestyles should be
Fujian 0.3053 0.2844 − 0.0209 0.3005 23 accelerated. Moreover, the relevant requirements of carbon neutrality in
Shandong 0.4365 0.4901 0.0536 0.4689 6 the industrial sector should be combined to explore the path of reducing
Guangdong 0.4702 0.5627 0.0925 0.5562 1 various types of key industrial solid waste. The construction of green
Hainan 0.2309 0.425 0.1941 0.3372 13
mines and ZW mines should be comprehensively promoted to reduce the
Liaoning 0.4082 0.376 − 0.0322 0.4165 7
Jilin 0.3845 0.3327 − 0.0518 0.3754 11 amount of industrial solid waste stored in landfills and solve the problem
Heilongjiang 0.3412 0.2978 − 0.0434 0.4057 8 of historical solid waste stockpiles (Du et al., 2017). For hazardous
Shanxi 0.3049 0.3317 0.0268 0.3240 17 waste, supervision and disposal capacity should be strengthened. To
Anhui 0.24 0.3645 0.1245 0.3129 18 effectively prevent and control the environmental risks of hazardous
Jiangxi 0.2419 0.28 0.0381 0.2645 29
Henan 0.3505 0.3566 0.0061 0.3950 10
waste and reduce the amount of industrial hazardous waste generated,
Hubei 0.3304 0.4173 0.0869 0.3978 9 stakeholders must research, develop, and promote relevant production
Hunan 0.2716 0.3181 0.0465 0.3096 20 processes and equipment. Furthermore, domestic waste should practise
Inner
0.2572 0.3659 0.1087 0.3328 15 a green lifestyle and adhere to the common construction, governance,
Mongolia
and sharing. It should also promote the classification of domestic waste
Guangxi 0.2641 0.3405 0.0764 0.3031 22
Chongqing 0.2967 0.3515 0.0548 0.3071 21 in depth and improve the sorting, placing, collecting, transporting, and
Sichuan 0.2901 0.3378 0.0477 0.3251 16 treating systems. By constructing various ZW cells, a moderate, green,
Guizhou 0.1714 0.3347 0.1633 0.2763 27 low-carbon, and healthy lifestyle and consumption pattern will be
Yunnan 0.1899 0.3922 0.2023 0.2790 26 formed. Moreover, the level of domestic waste reduction and resource­
Tibet 0.1865 0.2345 0.048 0.2245 31
fulness will be improved. For agricultural waste, we should actively
Shaanxi 0.2538 0.3029 0.0491 0.3125 19
Gansu 0.1814 0.3498 0.1684 0.2691 28 develop a circular agricultural economy, focus on building a recycling
Qinghai 0.2073 0.3474 0.1401 0.2598 30 system, and promote the comprehensive use of major agricultural waste
Ningxia 0.3182 0.3162 − 0.002 0.3346 14 (Li et al., 2021).
Xinjiang 0.2679 0.3168 0.0489 0.2898 25
Lastly, by integrating various technical means such as TOP­
China 0.3146 0.3807 0.0661 0.3583
SIS–entropy weight method, ArcGIS, and multiple linear regression
analysis model, we can effectively realize the evaluation of ZW level,
spatial analysis, and diagnosis of influencing factors of ZW level in
Table 5
China. Therefore, this study forms a relatively complete integrating
Correlation of potential influencing factors with ZW levels.
research system. On the one hand, it makes an important supplement
Type Item Eastern Central Western and improvement to the existing research system on evaluating solid
GDP per capita waste disposal performance. This study also has an important contri­
Economy Investment in industrial bution to the field of research on ZW cities and essential theoretical
pollution control value. On the other hand, based on this study’s findings, the Chinese
Number of patent applications government can improve the relevant policies to further enhance the ZW
Technology Internal investment in R&D level and narrow the regional gap, which is an important practical value
Numbers of High-tech of this study.
development projects
Population density
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Percentage of tertiary sector
– –
Resource (East)
endowment Percentage of sector share Yishi Han: Methodology, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing –
–
(Central, West) original draft, Writing – review & editing. Junli Liu: Writing – review &
Coal generation (Central, editing. He Xu: Conceptualization, Supervision.
–
West)
Percentage of population with
Education specialist degree or above
Investment in education Declaration of Competing Interest

Note: (significant negative correlation) (weak correlation), (significant The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
positive correlation)，–(indicate no data index). interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

solid waste management, the central region has the best performance in
the source reduction. Moreover, the resourcefulness and development of
security capacity still are still high in the east and low in the west, and
the final disposal of solid waste in the northern region is better than that
in the southern region. Using a multiple linear regression analysis
model, we examined the influencing factors of ZW level in each region.
The results indicated that the impact of the same influencing factors on
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by The National Key Research and
Development Program of China [grant number 2019YFC1908502], The
National Social Science Fund of China [grant number 20CGL035],
Tianjin Academy of Social Sciences [21YQN-03], and Major special
projects in Guizhou Province [grant number 21GZZB15]

10
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Appendix A. Appendix

Spatial distribution of provincial ZW levels in China for the remaining years

11
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

12
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

Regional zero waste city performance by province

Province 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Agriculture Average

Beijing 0.5865 0.4509 0.5296 0.5567 0.5624 0.5398 0.6356 0.5157 0.5796 0.5448
Tianjin 0.3111 0.2542 0.2541 0.2946 0.2802 0.3111 0.3464 0.2817 0.3035 0.2920
Hebei 0.3303 0.2964 0.3067 0.3457 0.3805 0.3985 0.4533 0.3829 0.4171 0.3583
Shanghai 0.321 0.4455 0.4908 0.5894 0.4764 0.529 0.5265 0.4532 0.5353 0.4906
Jiangsu 0.6279 0.4558 0.5037 0.6238 0.5267 0.5955 0.641 0.5154 0.521 0.5549
Zhejiang 0.5028 0.4054 0.4669 0.5632 0.4731 0.4663 0.5652 0.4642 0.564 0.4954
Fujian 0.3114 0.2757 0.2909 0.3056 0.2668 0.2957 0.3709 0.2987 0.2924 0.3005
Shandong 0.6094 0.4022 0.4469 0.4817 0.4319 0.5153 0.4369 0.4378 0.5014 0.4689
Guangdong 0.5641 0.4444 0.5163 0.5857 0.5643 0.6248 0.6158 0.6132 0.5853 0.5562
Hainan 0.3525 0.2933 0.2785 0.2722 0.3222 0.3743 0.3982 0.4249 0.3781 0.3372
Liaoning 0.4115 0.3737 0.4055 0.4444 0.5135 0.4322 0.4327 0.3671 0.3348 0.4165
Jilin 0.3302 0.3641 0.3661 0.4178 0.3452 0.4077 0.4328 0.373 0.2994 0.3754
Heilongjiang 0.294 0.4632 0.4059 0.4857 0.4298 0.4694 0.461 0.4093 0.2729 0.4057
Shanxi 0.2954 0.2758 0.3258 0.3452 0.3194 0.3732 0.3739 0.2946 0.3355 0.3240
Anhui 0.2421 0.2714 0.2994 0.3183 0.3308 0.3578 0.4038 0.3007 0.4058 0.3129
Jiangxi 0.2476 0.2325 0.2613 0.2651 0.253 0.264 0.3461 0.2536 0.3454 0.2645
Henan 0.347 0.3781 0.4702 0.3452 0.4061 0.4586 0.4473 0.3904 0.4474 0.3950
Hubei 0.334 0.3125 0.3526 0.4303 0.446 0.471 0.4885 0.3949 0.4372 0.3978
Hunan 0.274 0.2847 0.3038 0.3441 0.3084 0.3353 0.3329 0.3229 0.2954 0.3096
Inner Mongolia 0.2641 0.3201 0.3157 0.3165 0.3977 0.3614 0.36 0.3695 0.3375 0.3328
Guangxi 0.259 0.2873 0.3029 0.3052 0.3194 0.3235 0.3345 0.2941 0.3831 0.3031
Chongqing 0.2315 0.2808 0.2677 0.3059 0.3087 0.3365 0.3826 0.309 0.2729 0.3071
Sichuan 0.2647 0.297 0.3245 0.3287 0.3347 0.3652 0.3943 0.3142 0.3848 0.3251
Guizhou 0.1964 0.2384 0.3343 0.2623 0.3181 0.2939 0.3391 0.2746 0.3053 0.2763
Yunnan 0.2535 0.2297 0.2765 0.2634 0.2824 0.2983 0.3175 0.2861 0.4195 0.2790
Tibet 0.1876 0.1889 0.229 0.2639 0.2345 0.2224 0.276 0.2213 0.2104 0.2245
Shaanxi 0.2543 0.2618 0.2746 0.3299 0.3267 0.3516 0.4148 0.3543 0.297 0.3125
Gansu 0.2201 0.2379 0.2367 0.2253 0.2716 0.3183 0.3214 0.3288 0.3172 0.2691
Qinghai 0.2306 0.2215 0.2499 0.2804 0.2548 0.2625 0.303 0.2404 0.3106 0.2598
Ningxia 0.3343 0.2957 0.3267 0.3362 0.3154 0.3866 0.357 0.3593 0.2821 0.3346
Xinjiang 0.256 0.2612 0.2828 0.3092 0.2895 0.3078 0.3065 0.3003 0.2476 0.2898

Regression analysis results

Eastern Region

Type Item T Coefficient R2

Intercept 3.882 0.2236***

GDP per capita − 3.9994 − 1.556 × 10− 6***
Economy
Investment in industrial pollution control 0.0649 2.409 × 10− 9
Number of patent applications 2.3831 1.418 × 10− 8**
Technology Internal investment in R&D 2.4893 1.112 × 10− 8**
0.5536
Numbers of High-tech development projects 0.0906 6.197 × 10− 8*
Percentage of tertiary sector 2.2047 0.0031**
Resource endowment
Population density − 1.258 − 9.858 × 10− 6**
Percentage of population with specialist degree or above 2.1627 0.4371**
Education
Investment in education 1.3221 3.597 × 10− 9*
Central Region
Type Item T Coefficient R2
Intercept 3.6214 0.3159***
GDP per capita 0.2789 2.5264 × 10− 7
Economy
Investment in industrial pollution control 2.9325 1.792 × 10− 7***
Number of patent applications 0.4433 5.183 × 10− 9
Technology Internal investment in R&D 1.6414 1.784 × 10− 8*
Numbers of High-tech development projects 1.992 3.801 × 10− 6** 0.5012
Percentage of sector share − 1.0475 − 0.00127*
Resource endowment Population density 1.1538 8.6461 × 10− 6
Coal generation − 3.1351 − 8.706 × 10− 7***
Percentage of population with specialist degree or above 1.771 0.67805**
Education
Investment in education 1.0223 4.335 × 10− 9
West Region
Type Item T Coefficient R2
Intercept 4.1983 0.1551***
GDP per capita 0.679 2.243 × 10− 7
Economy
Investment in industrial pollution control 0.8291 3.781 × 10− 8
Number of patent applications 1.6627 2.822 × 10− 8*
Technology Internal investment in R&D 1.5953 2.543 × 10− 8**
Numbers of High-tech development projects 1.1223 3.79095 × 10− 6** 0.4721
Percentage of sector share 2.3798 0.001742**
Resource endowment Population density − 2.4621 − 8.06817 × 10− 6
Coal generation − 1.1057 − 2.64589 × 10− 7**
Percentage of population with specialist degree or above 3.6562 0.4551***
Education
Investment in education 2.075 3.4953 × 10− 9**
Note: * **, * *, * are significant at the level of 1%, 5% and 10% respectively.

13
Y. Han et al. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 95 (2022) 106778

References Muller, L., Arruda, J.B.F., Alcantara, R.L.C., Pereira, R.L., 2021. A multi-criteria analysis
of alternatives for the treatment of municipal solid waste in the municipality of
Juazeiro do Norte Ceara. Engenharia Sanitaria E Ambiental. 26 (1), 159–170.
Abdel-Shafy, H.I., Mansour, M.S.M., 2018. Solid waste issue: sources, composition,
Olay-Romero, E., Turcott-Cervantes, D.E., del Hernández-Berriel, M.C., Lobo-García de
disposal, recycling, and valorization. Egypt. J. Pet. 27 (4), 1275–1290.
Cortázar, A., Cuartas-Hernández, M., De la Rosa-Gómez, I., 2020. Technical
Chen, W., Xia, J., 2007. Optimal combination of weight assignment method by
indicators to improve municipal solid waste management in developing countries: A
combining subjective and objective weight information. Pract. Understand.
case in Mexico. Waste Manag. 107, 201–210.
Mathemat. 37 (001), 17–22 (In Chinese).
Pais-Magalhães, V., Moutinho, V., Marques, A.C., 2020. Scoring method of eco-efficiency
Cifrian, E., Coz, A., Viguri, J., Andrés, A., 2010. Indicators for Valorisation of Municipal
using the DEA approach: evidence from European waste sectors. Environ. Dev.
Solid Waste and Special Waste. Waste Biomass Valorizat. 1 (4), 479–486.
Sustain. 23 (7), 9726–9748.
Connett, Paul, 2013. The Zero Waste Solution. Chelsea Green Publishing, Vermont.
Ríos, A.-M., Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., 2021. Measuring environmental performance in the
Cordova-Pizarro, D., Aguilar-Barajas, I., Romero, D., Rodriguez, C., 2019. Circular
treatment of municipal solid waste: The case of the European Union-28. Ecol. Indic.
economy in the electronic products sector: material flow analysis and economic
123, 107328.
impact of cellphone e-waste in Mexico. Sustainability. 11 (5).
Sahimaa, O., Mattinen, M.K., Koskela, S., Salo, M., Sorvari, J., Myllymaa, T., Seppälä, J.,
DEFRA, 2011. Government review of waste policy in England [R/OL]. (2011-06-14). htt
2017. Towards zero climate emissions, zero waste, and one planet living - Testing the
ps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-review-of-waste-pol
applicability of three indicators in Finnish cities. Sustain. Produ. Consumpt. 10,
icy-in-england-2011.
121–132.
Du, X., Liu, X., Ge, Q., Jiang, L., Cui, L., 2017. A Preliminary Study on the Strategy of
Shi, X., 2020. Reflections on the construction of ‘Zero waste city’. Intelligent City. 18,
Construction a ‘No-Waste Society’ by Piloting ‘No-Waste City’. to Promote the
121–122 (In Chinese).
Resource Utilization of Solid Waste. China Eng. Sci. 04, 119–123 (In Chinese).
Snow, W., Julie, D., 2003. The Road to Zero Waste: Strategies for Sustainable
ElSaid, S., Aghezzaf, E.-H., 2017. A progress indicator-based assessment guide for
Communities, Auckland. http://www.zerowaste.co.nz/assets/Reports/roadtozero
integrated municipal solid-waste management systems. J. Mater. Cycles Waste
waste150dpi.pdf>.
Manag. 20 (2), 850–863.
Tang, J., Tong, M., Sun, Y., Du, J., Liu, N., 2020. A spatio-temporal perspective of China’s
European Commission, 2014. Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme for
industrial circular economy development. Sci. Total Environ. 706, 135754.
Europe [EB/OL] (2014-02-07). https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-ec
Tennant-Wood, R., 2003. Going for zero: a comparative critical analysis of zero waste
onomy/pdf/circular-economy-communication.pdf.
events in southern New South Wales. Australia. J. Environ. Manag. 10 (1), 46–55.
Farzadkia, M., Mahvi, A.H., Norouzian Baghani, A., Sorooshian, A., Delikhoon, M.,
The US Conference of Mayors. In support of municipal zero waste principles and a
Sheikhi, R., Ashournejad, Q., 2021. Municipal solid waste recycling: Impacts on
hierarchy of materials management [EB/OL]. (2015-06-23). https://www.usmayors.
energy savings and air pollution. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 71 (6), 737–753.
org/the-conference/resolutions/?category=b83aReso050&meeting=83rd. Annual
Feng, M.T., Bui, T.D., Tseng, M.L., Lim, M., Tan, R.R., 2021. Sustainable solid-waste
Meeting.
management in coastal and marine tourism cities in Vietnam: a hierarchical-level
UN-Habitat. Waste-wise cities: a call for action to address the municipal solid waste
approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 168, 105266.
challenge[EB/OL] (2019-05-25). https://www.un.org/en/events/habitatday/ass
Gu, B., Tang, X., Liu, L., Li, Y., Fujiwara, T., Sun, H., Jia, R., 2021. The recyclable waste
ets/pdf/call_of_action_Waste_Wise_Cities.pdf.
recycling potential towards zero waste cities - a comparison of three cities in China.
Wang, Y., 2021. Injecting new momentum for building a model city of green
J. Clean. Prod. 295, 126358.
development. State Grid News. 001 (In Chinese).
Huang, H., Li, Y., Wang, Z., 2020. Spatio-temporal changes of eco-efficiency and
Wen, Z., 2020. The concept of ‘no waste’ and the construction of a ‘no waste city’.
influencing factors of industrial land use at the provincial level of China. Acta Ecol.
Resource Regeneration. 10, 58–61 (In Chinese).
Sin. 40, 100–111.
Wen, H., Lu, F., Cao, Z., 2020. Research on the development level and influencing factors
Kanhai, G., Fobil, J.N., Nartey, B.A., Spadaro, J.V., Mudu, P., 2021. Urban Municipal
of provincial Zero-waste cities in China. Environ. Pollut. Prevent. 05, 628–633 (In
Solid Waste management: modeling air pollution scenarios and health impacts in the
Chinese).
case of Accra, Ghana. Waste Manag. 123, 15–22.
Wilson, D.C., Rodic, L., Scheinberg, A., Velis, C.A., Alabaster, G., 2012. Comparative
Kuo, L., Chang, B., 2021. The affecting factors of circular economy information and its
analysis of solid waste management in 20 cities. Waste Manag. Res. 30 (3), 237–254.
impact on corporate economic sustainability-Evidence from China. Sustain. Produ.
Xiao, H., 2018. Research on the measurement of circular economy development
Consumpt. 27, 986–997.
efficiency and its influencing factors (Master’s Thesis). Dongbei University of
Li, Z., 2021. Exploration and practice on the construction of classification system of
Finance and Economics (In Chinese).
kitchen waste in Xuzhou City Under the Background of ‘Zero Waste City’.
Xiu, T., 2017. Study on Present Situation and Management Countermeasures of
Environment. Sanit. Eng. (05) 17–22+29. (In Chinese).
Hazardous Waste in Heilongjiang. Environ. Sci. Manag. 02, 106–110 (In Chinese).
Li, Y., Jin, X., Huo, H., Zheng, Y., 2021. The progress of “Zero Waste City” construction
Xue, H., 2020. How to implement circular economy to build a ‘Zero waste city’. Financ.
and proposals for the 14th five- year Plan. Environ. Prot. 15, 42–47 (In Chinese).
Econ. 30, 16–17 (In Chinese).
Liu, X., Jiang, L., Ge, Q., Huhetaoli, Chen, Y., Cui, L., Du, X., 2019. Constructing a ‘No-
Yang, J., 2019. Study on the Evolutionary Game and Policy Simulation of Takeaway
Waste Society’. China Eng. Sci. 05, 144–150 (In Chinese).
Waste Recycling Governance (Master’s thesis. China University of Mining and
Lu, Y., Yuan, P., 2017. Measurement and spatial econometrics analysis of provincial
Technology) (In Chinese).
industrial ecological efficiency in China. Resource Sci. 39, 1326–1337.
Yang, D., 2021. Research on the development of zero waste cities and countermeasures
Lu, C., Zhang, Y., Li, H., Zhang, Z., Cheng, W., Jin, S., Liu, W., 2020. An integrated
in Shanxi Province (Master’s thesis. Shanxi University of Finance and Economics),
measurement of the efficiency of China’s industrial circular economy and associated
(In Chinese).
influencing factors. Mathematics. 8 (9).
Yang, Y., Xu, Y., Chen, X., Jin, Z., 2021. Study on the construction model of “zero waste
Ma, M., 2022. Study on the Cooperative Path of “Zero-waste City” Construction under
agriculture” in Xinning. China Econ. Trade J. 10, 66–69 (In Chinese).
the Target of “Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality” in Shanghai. Intell. Build.
Yu, H., 2014. Study on the Fiscal Countermeasures to Prevent and Resolve Resource &
Smart City 01, 37–39 (In Chinese).
Environment Risks (Doctoral dissertation, Institute of Fiscal Science, Ministry of
Ma, R., Cai, B., Tan, X., 2020. Research and application of solid waste dumping
Finance) (In Chinese).
calculation method in criminal cases of environmental pollution caused by illegal
Zaman, A.U., 2015. A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste
dumping of solid waste based on Arcgis. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 569 (1).
management: lessons learned and guidelines. J. Clean. Prod. 91, 12–25.
Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’’s Republic of China, 2019. Letter on
Zaman, A.U., Lehmann, S., 2013. The zero waste index: a performance measurement tool
“Zero-waste City” Construction Index System (for Trial Implementation). Available:
for waste management systems in a ‘zero waste city’. J. Clean. Prod. 50, 123–132.
http://www.mee.gov.cn/xxgk2018/xxgk/xxgk06/201905/t20190513_702598.html
Zhang, Y., 2019. Policy guidance and suggestions for promoting the pilot construction of
(Accessed on 8 May 2019).
‘Zero waste cities’. people’s Rule of Law (w14), 10–13 (In Chinese).
Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’’s Republic of China, 2021a. Notice
Zhang, Y., Wang, G., Zhang, Q., Ji, Y., Xu, H., 2021. What determines urban household
on the Public Consultation on the Work Plan for Promoting the Construction of Zero-
intention and behavior of solid waste separation? A case study in China. Environ.
waste Cities in the 14th Five-Year Plan Period (Draft for Comments). Available: htt
Impact Assess. Rev. 93, 106728.
p://www.mee.gov.cn/xxgk2018/xxgk/xxgk06/202109/t20210916_948195.html
Zhao, L., Wu, D., Jin, R., Wang, Q., 2019. Spatio-temporal evolution and influencing
(Accessed on 16 September 2021).
factors of inter-provincial green inclusive efficiency in China. Chin. J. Appl. Ecol. 09,
Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’’s Republic of China, 2021b.
3087–3096 (In Chinese).
Indicator system for the construction of “Zero-waste cities” (2021 version).
Zheng, K., Wen, Z., Chen, Y., 2021. A comparative country study on policies and
Available: http://www.mee.gov.cn/xxgk2018/xxgk/xxgk06/202109/W02021091
measures to promote the construction of ‘Zero waste cities’. China Environ. Manag.
6624628541366.pdf (Accessed on 16 September 2021).
05, 48–57 (In Chinese).
ZWIA. History of ZWIA[EB/OL]. (2018-06-24). http://zwia.org/history-of-zwia/.

14