Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Cities and Society

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

Spatiotemporal patterns and influencing factors of green development

efficiency in China’s urban agglomerations
Ting Yang a, Kaile Zhou b, *, Chi Zhang c
a
School of Health Services Management, Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230032, China
b
School of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China
c
Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China

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

Keywords: Urban agglomeration is an important means of collaborative regional development, and a critical organizational
Urban agglomeration form for cities when their industrialization and urbanization develop to a certain stage. The green development
Green development efficiency of urban agglomerations is important for achieving coordinated, high-quality regional development. In light of
Spatiotemporal variation
this, this study established an input–output index system that considers technological innovation and environ­
Influencing factor
Evaluation index system
mental quality. Then, we used a super-efficiency epsilon-based measure model that included undesirable output
to evaluate the green development efficiency of seven urban agglomerations in China: Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, the
Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, Chengdu–Chongqing, the Yangtze River Midstream, the Guanzhong
Plain, and the Central Plain. The spatiotemporal variability of the green development efficiency of each urban
agglomeration was analyzed using kernel density estimation, the coefficient of variation, and the Theil index.
Finally, a spatial econometric model was established to explore the factors affecting the green development
efficiency of different agglomerations. The findings improve our understanding of the spatiotemporal patterns of
green development in urban agglomerations, which can support the formulation of suitable strategies for
collaborative regional green development.

1. Introduction (Xinhua, 2021).

As pressure on energy resources continues to increase and the envi­
ronment deteriorates, the demand for clean, low-carbon, sustainable
development has become more urgent (Guo et al., 2020; Mahbaz et al.,
2020; Zhu et al., 2020). China’s economy has entered a “new normal”
stage of high-quality development, which is different from the
rapid-growth approach of the past three decades. In this process, it is
necessary to focus on continuously improving energy efficiency and
resource utilization, reducing pollutant emissions, transforming eco­
nomic development from extensive to intensive, building a
resource-conserving and environmentally friendly society, and forming
a path of coordinated sustainable development (Van Langen et al., 2021;
Wang et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2017). Green development is an
important element of China’s “new normal,” and the best option for
achieving economic transformation and high-quality development. It is
also a basic requirement for China to achieve its goals of reaching a
carbon emissions peak and carbon neutrality, which were first proposed
in September 2020 at the 75th United Nations General Assembly
As an important organizational form for cities, urban agglomerations
promote collaborative regional development. Urban agglomerations
also help to accelerate the construction of new types of urbanization and
promote economic and social transformation, thus achieving high-
quality regional development (Melo et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2021;
Yu et al., 2020). In China, as early as 2006, the Outline of the 11th
Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the Peo­
ple’s Republic of China noted that urban agglomerations should be taken
as the principal form for promoting urbanization. Cities that have the
necessary conditions for urban agglomeration should strengthen their
planning to form new urban agglomerations (China National People’s
Congress, 2006). Since then, urban agglomerations have developed
rapidly in China. In 2018, China further proposed that agglomerations
such as Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta, Guang­
dong–Hong Kong–Macau Greater Bay Area, Chengdu–Chongqing, the
Yangtze River Midstream, the Central Plain, and the Guanzhong Plain
can play key roles in integrated, high-quality development (China
Government Network, 2018). Some specific measures have also been

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhoukaile@hfut.edu.cn (K. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104069
Received 1 April 2022; Received in revised form 15 July 2022; Accepted 15 July 2022
Available online 17 July 2022
2210-6707/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

proposed to achieve China’s strategic goals for coordinated regional emissions in six urban agglomerations in China, and found that the
development. multicenter structure of some urban agglomerations did not achieve
The green development of urban agglomerations therefore plays a carbon-emission reduction. Yang et al. (2019) used the analytic hierar­
leading role in the green development of broader regions, and even the chy process (AHP) and entropy weighting to analyze the green devel­
country as a whole. In this regard, evaluating the green development of opment of 109 mineral resource-based cities in China from 2006 to
urban agglomerations has practical significance for understanding the 2016, and further used a GM (1, 1) gray model to predict the green
green status and sustainable development potential of different ag­ development trend of each city from 2017 to 2020. Hou et al. (2019)
glomerations, and for achieving integrated, high-quality regional used a long-tail effect model to investigate the green development per­
development. Some previous studies have investigated the green formance of 911 industrial parks in China. Wang et al. (2020) compar­
development evaluation of regions (Chakraborty et al., 2021; Fan et al., atively analyzed the green efficiency of 18 ports in five port groups in
2021; Hou et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2022, 2020; Yang et al., 2019; Zhao China from 2012 to 2016 using game cross-efficiency and com­
et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2019; Zhuo & Deng, 2020), as pete–cooperate cross-efficiency models in a data envelopment analysis
well as the development efficiency evaluation of urban agglomerations (DEA) framework. Zhou et al. (2020) analyzed spatiotemporal varia­
(Cheng et al., 2019; Fang et al., 2020; Huang & Li, 2017; Liu & Li, 2021; tions in the green development efficiency of 285 Chinese cities from
Qiu et al., 2020; Tang & He, 2021; Tang et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2018; 2005 to 2015 using an SBM model that included undesirable output.
Wu et al., 2021; Yuan et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2021; Zhong et al., Fan et al. (2021) analyzed the green innovation efficiency of 235 cities
2020). However, the spatiotemporal evolution of green development in China from 2004 to 2016 using an SBM model that considered un­
efficiency in urban agglomerations remains unclear. The present study desirable output. Using an SBM-DEA model, Zhuo & Deng (2020)
contributes to this body of literature in the following ways. First, an measured the green economic efficiency of 30 provinces in China from
input–output index system that considers undesirable outputs was 1996 to 2017. Liu & Dong (2021) calculated the green economic effi­
established. This index system can better reflect the economic and social ciency of 278 prefecture-level cities in China from 2003 to 2017 using a
development status of urban agglomerations. A super-efficiency epsi­ DEA game cross-efficiency model.
lon-based measure (EBM) model was used to comprehensively analyze Some studies have specifically examined the green development
the influencing factors of the green development of urban agglomera­ evaluation of urban agglomerations in China, as summarized in Table 1.
tions. Second, this study applied the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) For example, Fang et al. (2020), adopting a pop­
to explore the green development efficiency of urban agglomerations in ulation–resource–environment–development–satisfaction perspective,
China. It was found that the relationship between green development constructed evaluation and factor analysis models based on an improved
efficiency and per capita gross domestic product (PGDP) in the inves­ weight determination method (CV and AHP) to explore green develop­
tigated seven urban agglomerations showed a U-shaped curve. This ment in the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration from 2003 to
finding enhanced the understanding of urban agglomerations green 2017. Yuan et al. (2019) proposed a method for the spatial analysis of
development on a long-term time scale. Third, to fill the existing area green efficiency and total-factor productivity change, and analyzed
research gap and reveal the spatiotemporal evolution of green devel­ the spatial patterns and influencing factors of green development in the
opment efficiency of agglomerations, this study used a spatial Durbin
model (SDM) to further investigate the factors affecting green devel­
opment efficiency. Specifically, this study examined the effects of eco­ Table 1
nomic development level, population density, industrial structure, Studies related to evaluation models and methods for green development.
opening-up level, technological progress, and the influence of local Evaluation object Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation Refs.
government on the green development efficiency of the seven agglom­ dimension period model
erations. This study fills existing research gaps, and its findings improve
Pan-Pearl River Green 2006–2015 Global Liu &
the understanding of the green development efficiency of urban ag­ Delta Urban development Malmquist-DEA Li
glomerations. The results of this study also serve to better identify the agglomeration, level model (2021)
spatiotemporal patterns and influencing factors of regional green China
20 urban Green 2006–2015 Projection Huang
development, and provide a basis for the formulation of suitable stra­
agglomerations development pursuit model & Li
tegies for regional green development. in China composite (2017)
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. Section 2 re­ index
views the literature, while Section 3 presents the method and data Yangtze River Energy 2008–2017 SBM model Zhong
sources. The green development efficiency evaluation results are pre­ Urban economic et al.
agglomeration efficiency (2020)
sented in Section 4. Section 5 analyzes the factors affecting the green
Beijing-Tianjin- Dynamics of 2001–2018 Catastrophe Zhang
development efficiency of urban agglomerations, and Section 6 presents Hebei urban sustainability theory and et al.
the conclusions and policy implications. agglomeration adaptive cycle (2021)
framework
34 cities in Green 2003–2016 SBM-DEA model Guo
2. Literature review
Northeast development et al.
China efficiency (2020)
Some studies have examined the evaluation of regional green Pearl River Delta Green 2015 Multilevel Wang
development efficiency, using various methods and data sources and Urban economic evaluation et al.
adopting different perspectives. Using a super-efficiency slacks-based agglomeration, level method and (2018)
China entropy weight
model (SBM) that included undesirable output, Zhao et al. (2020) method (EWM)
analyzed the green economic efficiency of 30 provinces in China from Xuzhou Green 2000–2015 SBM model Qiu
2008 to 2017, and then used SDM to analyze the influencing factors. Metropolitan development et al.
Zhu et al. (2019) explored the effect of industrial restructuring on the Circle efficiency (2020)
Yangtze River Total factor 2003–2016 Super-efficiency Cheng
efficiency of provincial green development in China based on
Delta Urban eco-efficiency SBM model and et al.
super-efficiency SBM with undesirable output and panel regression. agglomeration global frontier (2019)
Focusing on the Kolkata urban agglomeration in eastern India, technology
Chakraborty et al. (2021) evaluated urban growth patterns and tested Wuhan urban Local and 2008–2018 Compounded Tang
hypotheses regarding spatiotemporal changes in urbanization patterns. agglomeration telecoupling night light index et al.
coordination (2021)
Wang et al. (2022) investigated the effect of spatial structure on carbon

2
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Shandong Peninsula urban agglomeration from 2005 to 2015. Tang & ∑ w− s−

He (2021) measured the total-factor energy efficiency of the Yangtze θ − ∈x mi=1 xi i0 i
r∗ = min ∑ ∑ wz− sz− (1)
River Economic Belt from 2005 to 2016 using the Luenber­
+ +
φ + ∈y sr=1 wyr r0sr + ∈z qp=1 pzp0p
ger–Hicks–Moorsteen total-factor productivity index. Wu et al. (2021)
analyzed the ecological carrying capacity of the Guangdong–Hong ⎧∑ n
⎪
Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area from 2000 to 2017. ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
xij λj + s−i = θxi0 (i = 1, 2, ⋯, m)
⎪
Previous studies have used green economic efficiency, green total- ⎪
⎪
⎪
j=1
⎪
factor productivity, environmental efficiency, and eco-efficiency as the ⎪ ∑n
⎪
⎪
⎨ yrj λj − s+r = φyr0 (r = 1, 2, ⋯, s)
measurement indices for green development evaluation. These studies s.t. j=1 ,
mainly focused on measuring green development efficiency and exam­ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∑n
⎪
ining regional differences and influencing factors in different cities, ⎪
⎪
⎪ zpj λj + Sp− = φzp0 (p = 1, 2, ⋯, q)
⎪
provinces, and regions. Regarding the green development evaluation of ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
j=1
⎩
urban agglomerations, existing studies have limitations in terms of the λj ≥ 0, s−i , s+ −
r , Sp ≥ 0
research framework, problem definition, index construction, method
selection, and data sources. Previous studies mainly focused on a specific where r∗ denotes the value of green development efficiency; n is the
urban agglomeration with different time dimensions. That approach number of DMUs; xij , yrj , and zpj denote the input, desirable output, and
makes it difficult to comparatively analyze spatiotemporal variation in undesirable output of the jth DMU, respectively; m, s, and q denote the
the green regional development of different urban agglomerations based number of indices for input, desirable output, and undesirable output,
on a unified standard. In addition, studies have tended to focus on a respectively; λ denotes the relative importance of the reference unit; θ
certain aspect of green development, and the evaluation index systems and φ denote the radial component; s−i , s+r , and Sp denote the slack of the
−

and evaluation methods have limitations. Most studies have relied on
methods including the SBM model and global frontier technology.
However, these approaches have certain shortcomings that make it
difficult to comprehensively analyze the influencing factors and
spatiotemporal evolution of the green development of urban agglom­
erations. In this regard, the super-efficiency EBM model can better
measure input–output efficiency (Li et al., 2020).
To fill the abovementioned gaps in the research, this study focused
on the dimensions of urban agglomerations, established an input–output
index system that considered technological innovation and environ­
mental quality, and used a super-efficiency EBM model that considered
undesirable output, which could better reflect the reality of economic
and social development. Using this approach, this study comparatively
analyzed the status of green development based on 2003–2018 panel
data for seven urban agglomerations: Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, the Yang­
tze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, Chengdu–Chongqing, the Yangtze
River Midstream, the Guanzhong Plain, and the Central Plain. On this
basis, this study used kernel density estimation (KDE), a spatial econo­
metric model, and the EKC to reveal spatiotemporal variations in the
green development efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations and
explore the influencing factors. In this way, this study aimed to provide a
reference for designing green development policies to promote inte­
grated regional development.
3. Method and data sources
3.1. Super-efficiency EBM model considering undesirable output
DEA was first proposed by Charnes, Cooper, and Rhodes in 1978
(Charnes et al., 1979). DEA has the advantages of simple operation,
reduced errors, and the elimination of subjective factors (Li & Lin,
2015). However, traditional DEA requires that all inputs and outputs be
decreased or increased by the same proportion, which is inconsistent
with actual production processes and has difficulty distinguishing
effective decision-making units (DMUs). In light of this, Tone & Tsutsui
(2010) proposed EBM, a hybrid model that contains both radial and SBM
distance functions. EBM considers the radial proportion between the
target and actual values and can capture the nonradial slack variables
differentiated between each input to find the difference between the
target and actual values. This can improve the accuracy and scientific
rationality of the results. Therefore, this study selected EBM with un­
desirable output and combined it with the “super-efficiency” model
proposed by Andersen & Petersen (1993) to evaluate the green devel­
opment efficiency of urban agglomerations in China.
The super-efficiency EBM model considering undesirable output is
expressed as follows:
input, desirable output, and undesirable output, respectively; w−i , w+
r ,
and w−p denote the index weight for each input, desirable output, and
undesirable output, respectively; and ∈ denotes the key parameter that
indicates the importance of the nonradial part.
3.2. KDE, Theil index, and coefficient of variation
KDE (Shi et al., 2021) is a density function for estimating unknowns
in the density function. It is an important means of nonparametric
estimation that is widely used in studies involving nonequilibrium in
spatial distribution (Qiu et al., 2020). In this study, KDE was used to
analyze the dynamic evolution patterns and regional distribution dif­
ferences of green development efficiency in seven urban agglomerations
in China. The formula for density function is shown in Eq. (2) as
( )
1 ∑ N
Xi − x
f (x) = K (2)
Nh i=1 h
where f(x) denotes the density function of green development effi­
ciency, x is the mean value, Xi is the observed value, N is the number of
observations, K(⋅) is the kernel function, and h is the bandwidth value.
The Theil index is a measure of income disparity (or inequality)
between individuals or regions, and is widely used to describe individual
differentiation (Qiu et al., 2020). This study used the Theil index (Zhang
et al., 2018) to measure spatial differences in the green development
efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations. Based on the decompos­
ability property of the Theil index, the spatial differences were decom­
posed into interregional and intraregional differences to further reveal
the main sources of spatial differences in the green development effi­
ciency of the agglomerations. The equation of the index is described in
Eq. (3) as
T = TB + TW (3)
where TB and TW denote intergroup and intragroup differences,
( )
( )
∑
respectively; TB = Kk=1 yk ln nyk /n
∑
, and TW = Kk=1 yk
∑ yi yi /yk
ln 1/nk ; n is
k
yk
i∈gk
the total number of cities; K is the number of urban agglomerations; each
urban agglomeration is gk and (k = 1, ⋯, K); the number of cities in the
Kth urban agglomeration is nk ; yi denotes the green development effi­
ciency of the ith city; and yk denotes the mean value of the green
development efficiency of the Kth urban agglomeration.
The coefficient of variation (CV) is a statistical measure of the degree
of variation in data observations; the larger the value, the greater the
difference (Ding et al., 2015). The CV was introduced in this study to

3
T. Yang et al.
measure the degree of variation in the green development efficiency of
the seven urban agglomerations. The CV is calculated by Eq. (4) as
σ
CV = (4)
μ
where σ is the standard deviation of green development efficiency, and μ
is the mean value of green development efficiency.
3.3. Spatial econometric analysis
Commonly used spatial econometric models include the spatial lag
model, the spatial error model, and SDM. SDM considers the spatial
autocorrelation of the dependent and independent variables. SDM was
therefore used to compare and analyze the factors affecting the green
development efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations. Many factors
affect green development efficiency. Referring to the literature, this
study selected six aspects to examine their influence on the green
development efficiency of the agglomerations: the economic develop­
ment level, population density, industrial structure, opening-up level,
technological progress, and the economic influence of local govern­
ments, which were represented by the PGDP, population density (PD),
proportion of tertiary industry in GDP (PTI), actual utilization of foreign
capital (AUFC) in the year, sum of per capita science and technology
expenditure and education expenditure (PST), and ratio of local gov­
ernments’ general public budget expenditure to GDP (PBE), respec­
tively. In addition, to visually verify the EKC (Zhao et al., 2021), the
squared and cubic terms for the logarithm of PGDP were included in the
spatial econometric model. In the case that the test result of the cubic
model was insignificant, the cubic model was excluded in favor of the
quadratic model. If the test result of the quadratic model remained
insignificant, linear regression was used (Li et al., 2021). To reduce
heteroskedasticity and nonstationarity, the natural logarithms were
taken for PGDP, PD, PTI, AUFC, PST, and PBE. The equation of the
model is as follows:
Fig. 1. Geographical distribution of seven urban agglomerations in China.
4
Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069
∑
n ∑
m m ∑
∑ n
Yit = β0 + γ Wij Yjt + βk Xijk + ρk Wij Xjtk + εit (5)
j=1 k=1 k=1 j=1
where Yit denotes green development efficiency, Wij denotes the spatial
weights matrix (the queen contiguity-based (row sum) spatial weights
matrix is used), Xit is the influencing factor of green development effi­
ciency, βk is the parameter of the kth independent variable, γ is the
spatial lag parameter, ρk is the spatial lag parameter of the kth inde­
pendent variable, and εit is the random error term.
3.4. Evaluation index system and data sources
Seven urban agglomerations in China were taken as the study object:
Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta,
Chengdu–Chongqing, the Yangtze River Midstream, the Guanzhong
Plain, and the Central Plain. These agglomerations are the main engines
of China’s future development. Their approximate geographical loca­
tions are shown in Fig. 1.
Based on existing evaluation systems for green development effi­
ciency and considering data availability, six input indices were selected
regarding the aspects of capital, manpower, technology, and energy.
Desirable outputs were selected from two perspectives: the quality of
economic development and the environment. Environmental pollutants
were taken as the undesirable outputs (Table 2).
The green development status of different agglomerations is not
exactly the same. Therefore, considering data availability, this study
maximized the coverage of multiple environmental indices across
different development periods to reveal the green development status of
the agglomerations as comprehensively and objectively as possible.
Panel data was selected for urban agglomerations from 2003 to 2018.
Fig. 2 displays changes in the PGDP and major pollutant emissions of the
agglomerations from 2003 to 2018. Because it is difficult to obtain data
such as depreciation rates for cities in urban agglomerations, this study
drew on Zheng & Pu (2021) and treated the total fixed-asset investment
in each city as the capital input and deflated it to the constant price in
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Table 2 prefecture-level cities were used.

Evaluation index system for the green development efficiency of urban As shown in Fig. 2, in terms of economic development level, the
agglomerations. PGDP of the seven urban agglomerations showed an upward trend from
Index Index composition Index content 2003 to 2018, but the disparities between agglomerations were also
Input index Capital investment Total investment in fixed assets (10,000
obvious. The PGDP values of the Pearl River Delta and the Yangtze River
yuan) Delta agglomerations were higher, reaching ¥115,968.3 and ¥103,860.5
Manpower input Number of employees at the end of the in 2018, respectively, while the Guanzhong Plain agglomeration had the
year (10,000 persons) lowest PGDP in 2018 at only ¥39,593.55. In addition, from 2003 to
Technical input Sum of education expenditure and
2018, the PGDP values of the seven urban agglomerations showed
science and technology expenditure
(10,000 yuan) varying trends of sustained growth. The PGDP values of the Yangtze
Water resources Total water supply in the municipal River Midstream and the Chengdu–Chongqing urban agglomerations
input area (10,000 tons) increased significantly by 6.37 and 6.39 times, respectively, while the
Electric energy Electricity consumption of the whole PGDP values of the Pearl River Delta, Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, and
input society in the municipal area (10,000
KWH)
Yangtze River Delta agglomerations were relatively low. In terms of
Land resource input Built-up area (km2) pollutant emissions, from 2003 to 2018, the emissions of pollutants such
Expected output Economic City GDP (10,000 yuan) as industrial wastewater, industrial sulfur dioxide, and industrial smoke
index development level (dust) in the seven urban agglomerations fluctuated but showed a
Environmental Greening coverage rate of built-up area
downward trend overall. Since 2014, pollutant emissions decreased
quality (%)
Unexpected Wastewater Industrial wastewater discharge significantly, especially in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, Yangtze River
output index discharge (10,000 tons) Delta, and Central Plain urban agglomerations. For discharges of in­
Exhaust emission Industrial sulfur dioxide emission dustrial wastewater, the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta ag­
(tons), industrial smoke and dust glomerations had significantly higher discharges than the other
emission (tons)
agglomerations. With regard to the emissions of industrial sulfur dioxide
Solid waste Untreated rate of general industrial
discharge solid waste (%) and industrial smoke (dust), the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei and Chengdu–­
Chongqing urban agglomerations had significantly higher emissions
than the other agglomerations. Emissions of industrial smoke (dust)
2003 using the price index for fixed-asset investment to eliminate the showed an upward trend in the agglomerations around 2011, especially
influence of price factors. Desirable outputs reflecting the quality of in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, and did not decline until after 2014. This re­
economic development were expressed by the city’s gross regional flects the fact that the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei urban agglomeration and
product and deflated by the base period of 2003. The data for each other areas have been plagued by haze in recent years, and face diffi­
variable came from the 2004 to 2019 China City Statistical Yearbooks, the culties with air pollution control. Since 2014, national and local gov­
provincial statistical yearbooks, and the prefecture-level statistical ernments have introduced various air pollution control regulations,
yearbooks. The linear interpolation method or the mean method was which have achieved some results.
used to complete missing data. In addition, prefecture-level cities in the In summary, from 2003 to 2018, the economic development level of
seven urban agglomerations were studied according to data availability. the seven urban agglomerations showed an upward trend, while
Among them, Hong Kong and Macao in the Pearl River Delta urban pollutant emissions decreased year by year, suggesting that these ag­
agglomeration were excluded. In the other agglomerations, for counties glomerations were gradually moving toward green development.
or districts with certain prefecture-level cities, the data for

Fig. 2. PGDP and major pollutant emissions in seven urban agglomerations, 2003–2018.

5
T. Yang et al.
However, that there were large differences in the economic develop­
ment level and pollutant emissions of different agglomerations,
reflecting the representativeness of the study objects. Thus, there is a
need to further explore the green development statuses of the agglom­
erations and the differences between them. This study therefore used
methods including EBM, KDE, CV, and a spatial econometric model to
compare spatiotemporal variations in green development efficiency and
its influencing mechanisms in the seven urban agglomerations.
4. Green development efficiency evaluation results
4.1. Time-series evolution patterns of green development efficiency
To verify the validity of the EBM model, MaxDEA 8.0 was used to
compare and analyze the measurement results of the three DEA mod­
els—EBM, SBM, and BCC—that consider undesirable output. The results
are shown in Fig. 3.
As shown in Fig. 3, the results estimated using super-efficiency EBM
considering undesirable output were between those estimated using
SBM and BCC. Referring to Andersen & Petersen (1993), such results
indicated that the EBM model overcame the defects of the SBM and BCC
models, thus improving the accuracy of the results and making them
more in line with socioeconomic reality. Therefore, this study used the
super-efficiency EBM model with undesirable output to estimate the
green development efficiency of the urban agglomerations. The results
are illustrated in Fig. 4. This study further calculated the average value
of green development efficiency for each urban agglomeration, analyzed
the temporal evolution of the green development efficiency of the ag­
glomerations (Fig. 5), and drew a spatial pattern map using data for
2003 and 2018 (Fig. 6).
As shown in Fig. 4, the green development efficiency of cities in the
seven urban agglomerations was obviously different. The development
efficiency of coastal cities was higher in 2003, but by 2018, the effi­
ciency of many of these coastal cities decreased, while the green
development efficiency of central cities increased significantly.
The mean value of green development efficiency in the seven urban
agglomerations ranged from 0.85 to 0.9 and showed a slow upward
trend (Fig. 5). Specifically, from 2003 to 2011, there was a rising and
then slowly declining fluctuation, and from 2011 to 2018, there was an
upward trend that was closely related to the importance attached to
green development by China in recent years. The green development
efficiency of the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta urban ag­
glomerations was higher than that of the other urban agglomerations,
with a small fluctuation range but a slow decreasing trend. The fluctu­
ation range of the green development efficiency of the Yangtze River
Midstream urban agglomeration was small, and the efficiency curve
stayed in the middle. In contrast, the fluctuation range of green
Fig. 3. Changes in the mean value of green development efficiency of seven urban agglomerations, 2003–2018.
6
Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069
development efficiency in the Guanzhong Plain urban agglomeration
was relatively large and showed a rapid upward trend, especially after
2010. The green development efficiency of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei,
Chengdu–Chongqing, and Central Plain agglomerations was relatively
low. The green development efficiency of the Chengdu–Chongqing
urban agglomeration showed a significant downward trend around
2015, but showed an upward trend in more recent years. As shown in
Fig. 6, there were obvious differences in green development efficiency
among the seven urban agglomerations, but such differences narrowed
year by year.
4.2. Dynamic evolution patterns of green development efficiency in urban
agglomerations
To further analyze the overall evolution of green development effi­
ciency in the urban agglomerations, KDE was used to estimate green
development efficiency in 2003, 2006, 2009, 2012, 2015, and 2018.
Fig. 7 shows the derived kernel density distribution.
Judging from the position of the center of gravity of the kernel
density curves in each year, the center of gravity shifted significantly to
the right during 2003–2009 and 2012–2018 and to the left during
2009–2012. This revealed a “rising–declining–rising” pattern in the
green development efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations during
the study period. Regarding the shape of the kernel density curves, the
curves in all six periods showed an M-shaped bimodal distribution,
indicating that the green development efficiency of the agglomerations
was seriously polarized. Additionally, the peak height of the main peak
increased year by year in more recent years, indicating that the gap
between cities in the seven urban agglomerations gradually widened.
The peaks were located on the right side in all years, indicating that the
green development efficiency of most cities in the agglomerations was in
a medium-high state. Judging from the trailing tails on both sides of the
nuclear density curve, the extension of the right tail increased signifi­
cantly after 2012, indicating high-value clusters in the green develop­
ment efficiency of the agglomerations in more recent years.
4.3. Patterns of regional difference in green development efficiency
Based on the above analysis, there were obvious differences in the
green development efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations. This
study sought to determine what exactly these differences were and
identify their trends. The CV and the Theil index were introduced to
analyze differences in the green development efficiency of each urban
agglomeration. The results are illustrated in Fig. 8.
The green development efficiency of the seven urban agglomerations
from 2003 to 2018 showed a seemingly M-shaped change, the CV of
green development efficiency showed a W-shaped change, and the Theil
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Fig. 4. Spatial pattern of the green development efficiency of cities in seven urban agglomerations.

Fig. 5. Time-series evolution patterns of green development efficiency in seven urban agglomerations, 2003–2018.

Fig. 6. Spatial patterns of average green development efficiency in seven urban agglomerations.

7
T. Yang et al.
Fig. 7. Kernel density curves of the dynamic evolution of green development efficiency in seven urban agglomerations.
Fig. 8. CV and Theil index values of differences in the green development efficiency of seven urban agglomerations.
index showed similar trends (Figs. 5 and 8). The change of green
development efficiency in the study period can be divided into three
stages. In the first stage (2003–2009), the green development efficiency
of urban agglomerations increased, the Theil index decreased from
0.1815 in 2003 to 0.146 in 2009, and regional differences narrowed. In
the second stage (2009–2012), the green development efficiency of
urban agglomerations slowly decreased, but the Theil index showed an
increasing trend, and regional differences widened. In the third stage
(2012–2018), the green development efficiency of urban agglomera­
tions showed a fluctuating upward trend, the CV and the Theil index
fluctuated slightly, and regional differences were gradually moderated.
The decomposition of the Theil index revealed that intragroup variation
was the main reason for the differences in green development efficiency
among the seven urban agglomerations. This also illustrates the signif­
icant differences between the results depicted in Figs. 4 and 6.
8
Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069
5. Factors affecting green development efficiency
According to the above analysis, the economic development level
and factor endowment of the seven urban agglomerations differed
greatly, and the importance of the factors affecting green development
efficiency also differed. Therefore, the SDM was used to further inves­
tigate the influence of six aspects (the economic development level,
population density, industrial structure, opening-up level, technological
progress, and economic influence of local governments) on the green
development efficiency of the agglomerations to grasp their green
development levels and analyze their sustainable development poten­
tial. Table 3 shows the detailed information for each index.
To visually verify the EKC, this study first examined the fitted re­
lationships between green development efficiency and economic growth
in the seven urban agglomerations (Fig. 9). The relationship between
green development efficiency and PGDP in the urban agglomerations
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Table 3 factor needed to be considered when analyzing the influencing factors.

Factors affecting the green development efficiency of the urban agglomerations. Technological progress and the economic influence of local governments
Index composition Index content had a significant negative influence on the green development efficiency
of the seven urban agglomerations. These two factors should have been
PGDP Per capita GDP (yuan)
Population density (PD) Population per unit land area (person/km2) inherent sources for improving green development efficiency. However,
Industrial structure (PTI) Proportion of GDP of tertiary industry in GDP (%) resources were not optimized for allocation, likely because of insuffi­
Degree of openness (AUFC) Actual amount of foreign capital used in the current cient local government attention to green development, and the devel­
year (USD 10,000) opment model might have still been industry-oriented. In the future,
Technological progress (PST) Sum of per capita science and technology
expenditure and education expenditure (yuan)
therefore, local governments should attach more importance to expen­
Local government economic Ratio of general public budget expenditure of local diture on environmental protection and technological innovation to
influence (PBE) finance to GDP (%) promote coordinated economic and environmental development. Pop­
ulation density had a positive but insufficient influence on the green
development efficiency of the agglomerations. The opening-up level had
had a U-shaped curve, indicating a trend of decreasing and then
both positive and negative effects on green development efficiency,
increasing with increased PGDP. It is difficult, however, to intuitively
indicating that the utilization of foreign capital in each agglomeration
determine the change trend between green development efficiency and
produced either a higher level of technology or an increase in emissions.
economic development in each of the seven urban agglomerations.
It should be noted that the result did not reveal the relationship between
Therefore, SDM was used to explore the mechanism of each influencing
the level of technology and emissions. Industrial structure had a sig­
factor on the green development efficiency of the seven urban
nificant positive influence on the green development efficiency of the
agglomerations.
Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta, Guanz­
Based on model (5) and the panel data, the Hausman test was used to
hong Plain, and Central Plain urban agglomerations, but had a negative
determine whether to select fixed effects or random effects. The results
effect on the Chengdu–Chongqing and Yangtze River Midstream ag­
indicated that random effects should be selected for the Yangtze River
glomerations. This showed that the expansion of tertiary industry had a
Delta (p value = 0.3508), Chengdu–Chongqing (p value = 0.9553), the
positive effect on the green development efficiency of the Bei­
Yangtze River Midstream (p value = 0.2453), the Guanzhong Plain (p
jing–Tianjin–Hebei, Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta, Guanzhong
value = 0.8981), and the Central Plain (p value = 0.5792). The results
Plain, and Central Plain agglomerations. Thus, the Chengdu–Chongqing
for the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei and Pearl River Delta agglomerations
and Yangtze River Midstream urban agglomerations should pay more
showed negative chi-square variances, and the p-values did not pass the
attention to adjusting and upgrading their industrial structures. The
significance test; however, the adjusted R2 of the random-effects model
relationship between the economic development level and green
was significantly better than that of the fixed-effects model. Therefore,
development efficiency is not simply linear, but rather U-shaped or N-
an SDM with random effects was selected for all seven urban agglom­
shaped. On that basis, this study further analyzed the green development
erations for testing and analysis. Table 4 shows the test results.
status of each urban agglomeration by combining the points of inflection
In Table 4, W represents the spatial weight matrix. W multiplied by
of each curve (Table 5).
the variable represents the spatial term of the variable, which reflects
In Table 5, N is the number of samples. Based on the data shown in
the influence of each variable in the adjacent region on the explained
Table 5, the EKC hypothesis held true between the economic develop­
variable. PGDP2 and PGDP3 represent the square term and cubic term of
ment level and green development efficiency of each urban agglomer­
per capita GDP, respectively.
ation. It did not conform to the traditional EKC effect, but rather
As shown in Table 4, the seven urban agglomerations had positive
presented different N-shaped and U-shaped relationships, demon­
and negative spatial autoregressive coefficients (γ), and most passed the
strating apparent unbalanced green development among the agglom­
10% significance test. If the significance test was passed, a positive or
erations. Specifically, the economic development level and green
negative value of γ meant that there was a positive or negative corre­
development efficiency of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei, Chengdu–­
lation of green development efficiency between two urban agglomera­
Chongqing, and Central Plain urban agglomerations showed a U-shaped
tions, respectively. This indicated that the green development efficiency
curve, indicating that with economic growth, the green development
of the urban agglomerations had a spatial effect, and thus the spatial
efficiency of these three urban agglomerations experienced a

Fig. 9. Fitting relationships between the green development efficiency and economic development level of seven urban agglomerations.

9
T. Yang et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069

Table 4
Regression results of the spatial Durbin model (SDM).
URIF Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Yangtze River Delta Pearl River Delta Chengdu-Chongqing Yangtze River Midstream Central Plain Guanzhong Plain

PGDP − 1.268*** 5.876*** 10.461*** − 0.542** 4.958*** − 0.394** 7.614***

(0.249) (1.585) (0.321) (0.222) (1.721) (0.174) (1.193)
2
PGDP 0.069*** − 0.559*** − 0.989*** 0.041*** − 0.517*** 0.03*** − 0.802***
(0.012) (0.153) (0.029) (0.012) (0.172) (0.009) (0.124)
PGDP3 _ 0.018*** 0.031*** _ 0.018*** _ 0.028***
(0.005) (0.001) (0.006) (0.004)
PST − 0.099** − 0.029 − 0.012 − 0.237*** − 0.116*** − 0.071* 0.04
(0.045) (0.024) (0.014) (0.054) (0.035) (0.04) (0.043)
PTI 0.132** 0.128*** 0.169*** − 0.209*** − 0.083 0.154*** 0.154**
(0.057) (0.047) (0.06) (0.055) (0.056) (0.039) (0.06)
PBE − 0.043 − 0.044** − 0.014 − 0.094*** − 0.041 − 0.076*** − 0.072**
(0.032) (0.019) (0.016) (0.025) (0.027) (0.028) (0.029)
PD 0.066 0.019 0.114*** 0.038 0.01 − 0.023 − 0.091*
(0.049) (0.03) (0.03) (0.049) (0.049) (0.042) (0.05)
AUFC 0.021* − 0.004 0.007 − 0.0005 − 0.015 − 0.002 0.003
(0.013) (0.008) (0.014) (0.006) (0.01) (0.007) (0.011)
β0 6.609*** − 19.483*** − 94.32*** 1.688 − 0.52 2.893*** − 22.35***
(1.303) (5.446) (3.68) (2.086) (9.535) (0.845) (3.909)
W*PGDP − 0.089 − 0.155 14.517*** 0.496 − 4.469** − 0.262** 0.427
(0.121) (0.243) (0.709) (0.365) (2.21) (0.115) (0.498)
W*PGDP2 0.007 0.0009 − 1.225*** − 0.04** 0.476** − 0.005 0.024
(0.009) (0.038) (0.066) (0.019) (0.224) (0.007) (0.094)
W*PGDP3 _ 0.0006 0.034*** _ − 0.017** _ − 0.001
(0.02) (0.002) (0.008) (0.005)
W*PST 0.063 0.035 − 0.13*** 0.272*** − 0.008 0.114* 0.466***
(0.077) (0.04) (0.03) (0.069) (0.051) (0.062) (0.124)
W*PTI − 0.252*** 0.0009 0.213*** 0.054 − 0.226*** − 0.096* 0.253*
(0.085) (0.078) (0.081) (0.078) (0.07) (0.054) (0.131)
W*PBE − 0.026 − 0.095* 0.017 0.096 0.086* 0.071 − 0.752***
(0.041) (0.05) (0.027) (0.049) (0.05) (0.064) (0.14)
W*PD 0.203 0.229*** − 0.116* − 0.08 − 0.015 0.192* 0.168
(0.125) (0.07) (0.063) (0.171) (0.079) (0.1) (0.158)
W*AUFC 0.008 0.036* 0.101*** − 0.007 0.002 0.043* 0.048**
(0.028) (0.018) (0.021) (0.014) (0.018) (0.019) (0.025)
γ − 0.198* 0.063 − 0.214** 0.202** − 0.075 0.131* − 0.214*
(0.11) (0.08) (0.108) (0.084) (0.062) (0.073) (0.118)
R2 0.4491 0.3015 0.7195 0.4338 0.1554 0.3013 0.4412

Note: ***, **, and *indicate significance levels of 0.01, 0.05, and 0.1, respectively. The numbers in brackets indicate robust standard error, and "-" indicates that they
are not included.

Jiangmen, Zhaoqing, Huizhou, Tianshui, Pingliang, and Qingyang in the

Table 5
Pearl River Delta and the Guanzhong Plain urban agglomerations did
Inflection points of the environmental Kuznets curves (EKCs) of green devel­
not cross the inflection point. Thus, these cities should focus on high-
opment efficiency of seven urban agglomerations.
quality economic development and aim to achieve green development.
Urban agglomerations N Curves Inflection Points Year
Overall, the green development efficiency of most cities showed an
Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei 208 U-shaped 9783.04 2005–2006 increasing trend with increases in PGDP. This meant that economic
Yangtze River Delta 416 N-shaped 31,314.98 2015–2016 development and green development showed a trend of coordinated
Pearl River Delta 144 N-shaped 19,061.97
development. Factors including the economic development level, pop­
90,523.65
Chengdu–Chongqing 256 U-shaped 1202.59 Before 2003 ulation density, industrial structure, opening-up level, technological
Yangtze River Midstrea 488 N-shaped 14,386.91 2010–2011 progress, and economic influence of local governments had different
Central Plain 464 U-shaped 711 Before 2003 influences on green development efficiency. This finding reflected the
Guanzhong Plain 176 N-shaped 6840.12
imbalances in green development among the urban agglomerations.
28,700.71
Such differences should be considered in policy formulation. Collabo­
rative green development among urban agglomerations is a key concern
declining→rising process with an inflection point on the curve. The in the process of achieving high-quality development in China.
analysis of the economic development level of each city showed that
they all crossed the inflection point after 2006, indicating that green 6. Conclusions and policy implications
development efficiency increased significantly with economic growth.
The relationship between the economic development level and green In this study, a super-efficiency EBM model that included undesir­
development efficiency in the Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta, able output was used to explore green development efficiency and its
Yangtze River Midstream, and Guanzhong Plain agglomerations showed spatiotemporal variations in seven urban agglomerations (Bei­
an N-shaped curve, indicating that the green development efficiency of jing–Tianjin–Hebei, the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta,
those four agglomerations went through a rising→ declining→ rising Chengdu–Chongqing, the Yangtze River Midstream, the Guanzhong
process with economic growth. Combined with the inflection point Plain, and the Central Plain) from 2003 to 2018. This study further
analysis, the findings demonstrated that cities in the Yangtze River Delta combined spatial econometric methods to explore the factors affecting
and Yangtze River Midstream urban agglomerations crossed the inflec­ the green development efficiency of each urban agglomeration. The
tion point after 2016, and green development efficiency increased with main conclusions are summarized below.
the rise of economic development levels. However, cities including

10
T. Yang et al.
(1) Overall, the green development efficiency of the seven urban
agglomerations was at an above-average level, with the average
efficiency value ranging from 0.85 to 0.9, showing a slow upward
trend in more recent years. Since 2015, the central and local
government has attached increasing importance to green devel­
opment and coordinated regional development, and green
development efficiency has correspondingly increased.
(2) There were obvious differences in the green development effi­
ciency of the urban agglomerations, which were mainly caused
by the internal differences in each agglomeration. Although
intergroup differences in the green development efficiency of the
agglomerations narrowed in recent years, there were still large
differences within the agglomerations. These urban agglomera­
tions should therefore aim to optimize the allocation of resources,
transfer of industries, and division of labor.
(3) The green development efficiency of the seven urban agglomer­
ations had spatial effects, and the green development efficiencies
of neighboring cities influenced each other. Therefore, exchange
and cooperation between agglomerations and between cities
should be strengthened.
(4) The EKC hypothesis held trued between the economic develop­
ment level and green development efficiency of the seven urban
agglomerations. It did not, however, conform to the traditional
EKC effect, but presented N-shaped and U-shaped relationships.
The analysis of the inflection points of the curves showed that the
green development efficiency of most cities increased with in­
creases in PGDP. This indicated that economic development and
green development belonged to a coordinated development
trend.
The results of the present study revealed significant imbalances in
green development among the seven investigated urban agglomerations.
Therefore, differentiated policies for regional green development should
be formulated according to the status quo, conditions, positioning, and
goals of regional development. Mechanisms such as national-level policy
incentives and guidance can give full play to the characteristics of each
region in their integrated development, foster strengths, circumvent
weaknesses, and closely collaborate to promote rational industry
specialization, optimal resource allocation, and the orderly flow of
production factors. Policies should also give play to the radiating role of
regions with better ecological foundations and stronger economic
development to establish synergies and achieve coordinated, high-
quality regional development. In particular, considering China’s aim
to achieve peak carbon by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, regions
cannot work independently when formulating green development pol­
icies. Rather, they must balance self-interest and altruism, focusing on
not only their own sustainable development, but also on the collabora­
tive and integrated green development of other regions.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by the Research Start-up Fund for Teachers
with Doctoral Degrees of Anhui Medical University (No. 0501037201).
11
Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069
References
Andersen, P., & Petersen, N. C. (1993). A procedure for ranking efficientunits in data
envelopment analysis. Management Science, 39(10), 1261–1264.
Chakraborty, S., Maity, I., Patel, P. P., et al. (2021). Spatio-temporal patterns of
urbanization in the Kolkata urban agglomeration: A dynamic spatial territory-based
approach. Sustainable Cities and Society, 67, Article 102715.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1979). Measuring the efficiency of decision
making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.
Cheng, Y., Shao, T., Lai, H., & Shen, M. (2019). Total-factor eco-efficiency and its
influencing factors in the Yangtze River delta urban agglomeration, China.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), 3814.
China Government Network, (2018). Opinions of the CPC central committee and the
state council on establishing a more effective new mechanism for regional
coordinated development. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2018-11/29/content_53
44537.htm.
China National People’s Congress, (2006). Outline of the eleventh five year plan for
national economic and social development of the People’s Republic of China. http://
www.npc.gov.cn/wxzl/gongbao/2006-03/18/content_5347869.htm.
Ding, Z., Zhang, G., & Wang, F. (2015). Spatial-temporal differentiation of urban-rural
income in central plains region at different scales. Geographical Research, 34(1),
131–148 (in Chinese).
Fan, F., Lian, H., Liu, X., & Wang, X. (2021). Can environmental regulation promote
urban green innovation Efficiency? An empirical study based on Chinese cities.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 287, Article 125060.
Fang, G., Wang, Q., & Tian, L. (2020). Green development of Yangtze River Delta in
China under population-resources-environment-development-satisfaction
perspective. Science of the Total Environment, 727, Article 138710.
Guo, Y., Tong, L., & Mei, L. (2020). The effect of industrial agglomeration on green
development efficiency in Northeast China since the revitalization. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 258, Article 120584.
Hou, D., Li, G., Chen, D., Zhu, B., & Hu, S. (2019). Evaluation and analysis on the green
development of China’s industrial parks using the long-tail effect model. Journal of
Environmental Management, 248, Article 109288.
Huang, Y., & Li, L. (2017). A comprehensive assessment of green development and its
spatial-temporal evolution in urban agglomerations of China. Geographical Research,
36(7), 1309–1322.
Li, D., Lin, L., Lin, Z., Zhang, S., & An, L. (2021). EKC test of ecological protection and
high-quality development in the Yellow River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 41(10),
1–10 (in Chinese).
Li, K., & Lin, B. (2015). The improvement gap in energy intensity: Analysis of China’s
thirty provincial regions using the improved DEA (data envelopment analysis)
model. Energy, 84, 589–599.
Li, W., Xi, Y., Liu, S. Q., Li, M., Chen, L., Wu, X., … Masoud, W. (2020). An improved
evaluation framework for industrial green development: Considering the underlying
conditions. Ecological Indicators, 112, Article 106044.
Liu, T., & Li, Y. (2021). Green development of China’s Pan-Pearl River Delta mega-urban
agglomeration. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1–11.
Liu, Y., & Dong, F. (2021). How technological innovation impacts urban green economy
efficiency in emerging economies: A case study of 278 Chinese cities. Resources
Conservation and Recycling, 169, Article 105534.
Mahbaz, S. B., Dehghani-Sanij, A. R., Dusseault, M. B., & Nathwani, J. S. (2020).
Enhanced and integrated geothermal systems for sustainable development of
Canada’s northern communities. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 37,
Article 100565.
Melo, P. C., Graham, D. J., & Noland, R. B. (2009). A meta-analysis of estimates of urban
agglomeration economies. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 39(3), 332–342.
Qiu, F., Chen, Y., Tan, J., Liu, J., Zheng, J., & Zhang, X. (2020). Spatial-temporal
heterogeneity of green development efficiency and its influencing factors in growing
metropolitan area: A case study for the Xuzhou metropolitan area. Chinese
Geographical Science, 30(2), 352–365.
Shi, J., Duan, K., Wu, G., Li, J., & Xu, K. (2021). Efficiency of urban-rural integration
development in the Yangtze River Delta under the background of carbon emission
constraint. Economic Geography, 41(6), 57–67 (in Chinese).
Tang, L., & He, G. (2021). How to improve total factor energy efficiency? An empirical
analysis of the Yangtze River economic belt of China. Energy, 235(2), Article 121375.
Tang, P., Huang, J., Zhou, H., Fang, C., Zhan, Y., & Huang, W. (2021). Local and
telecoupling coordination degree model of urbanization and the eco-environment
based on RS and GIS: A case study in the Wuhan urban agglomeration. Sustainable
Cities and Society, 75, Article 103405.
Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2010). An epsilon-based measure of efficiency in DEA: A third
pole of technical efficiency. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3),
1554–1563.
Van, Langen, S. K., Vassillo, C., Ghisellini, P., Restaino, D., Passaro, R., & Ulgiati, S.
(2021). Promoting circular economy transition: A study about perceptions and
awareness by different stakeholders’ groups. Journal of Cleaner Production, 316,
Article 128166.
Wang, L., Zhou, Z., Yang, Y., & Wu, J. (2020). Green efficiency evaluation and
improvement of Chinese ports: A cross-efficiency model. Transportation Research Part
D: Transport and Environment, 88, Article 102590.
Wang, M., Zhao, H., Cui, J., Fan, D., Lv, B., Wang, G., … Zhou, G. (2018). Evaluating
green development level of nine cities within the Pearl River Delta, China. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 174, 315–323.
Wang, X., Song, J., & Duan, H. (2021). Coupling between energy efficiency and industrial
structure: An urban agglomeration case. Energy, 234, Article 121304.
T. Yang et al.
Wang, Y., Fang, X., Yin, S., & Chen, W. (2021). Low-carbon development quality of cities
in China: Evaluation and obstacle analysis. Sustainable Cities and Society, 64, Article
102553.
Wang, Y., Niu, Y., Li, M., Yu, Q., & Chen, W. (2022). Spatial structure and carbon
emission of urban agglomerations: Spatiotemporal characteristics and driving forces.
Sustainable Cities and Society, 78, Article 103600.
Wu, M., Wu, J., & Zang, C. (2021). A comprehensive evaluation of the eco-carrying
capacity and green economy in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, Article 124945.
Xinhua (2021).Fundamental way to realize carbon peak and carbon neutralization. -06-
22]. http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2021-06/22/c_1127586321.htm.
Yang, Y., Guo, H., Chen, L., Liu, X., Gu, M., & Ke, X. (2019). Regional analysis of the
green development level differences in Chinese mineral resource-based cities.
Resources Policy, 61, 261–272.
Yu, X., Wu, Z., Zheng, H., Li, M., & Tan, T. (2020). How urban agglomeration improve
the emission efficiency? A spatial econometric analysis of the Yangtze River Delta
urban agglomeration in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 260, Article
110061.
Yuan, W., Li, J., Li, M., Qin, X., & Qi, X. (2019). Measuring the area green efficiency and
the influencing factors in urban agglomeration. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241,
Article 118092.
Zhang, C., Zhou, K., Yang, S., & Shao, Z. (2017). On electricity consumption and
economic growth in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 353–368.
Zhang, G., Huang, W., Zhou, C., & Cao, Y. (2018). Spatio-temporal characteristics of
demographic distribution in China from the perspective of urban agglomeration.
Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(8), 1513–1525 (in Chinese).
Zhang, L., Huang, Q., He, C., Yue, H., & Zhao, Q. (2021). Assessing the dynamics of
sustainability for social-ecological systems based on the adaptive cycle framework: A
12
Sustainable Cities and Society 85 (2022) 104069
case study in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration. Sustainable Cities and
Society, 70, Article 102899.
Zhao, L., Liu, Y., Cao, N., Wu, D., & Jia, J. (2021). Spatiotemporal pattern and spillover
effects of inclusive green efficiency in China. Progress in Geography, 40(3), 382–396
(in Chinese).
Zhao, P., Zeng, L., Lu, H., Zhou, Y., Hu, H., & Wei, X. (2020). Green economic efficiency
and its influencing factors in China from 2008 to 2017: Based on the super-SBM
model with undesirable outputs and spatial Dubin model. Science of the Total
Environment, 741, Article 140026.
Zheng, X., & Pu, Y. (2021). Upgrading of industrial structure and environmental
efficiency in Chengdu-Chongqing twin-city economic circle – Based on the non-
dynamic panel threshold model. Soft Science, 35(11), 58–64 (in Chinese).
Zhong, Z., Peng, B., Xu, L., Andrews, A., & Elahi, E. (2020). Analysis of regional energy
economic efficiency and its influencing factors: A case study of Yangtze river urban
agglomeration. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 41, Article 100784.
Zhou, L., Zhou, C., Che, L., & Wang, B. (2020). Spatio-temporal evolution and influencing
factors of urban green development efficiency in China. Journal of Geographical
Sciences, 30(5), 724–742.
Zhu, B., Zhang, M., Huang, L., Wang, P., Su, B., & Wei, Y. (2020). Exploring the effect of
carbon trading mechanism on China’s green development efficiency: A novel
integrated approach. Energy Economics, 85, Article 104601.
Zhu, B., Zhang, M., Zhou, Y., Wang, P., Sheng, J., He, K., … Xie, R. (2019). Exploring the
effect of industrial structure adjustment on interprovincial green development
efficiency in China: A novel integrated approach. Energy policy, 134, Article 110946.
Zhuo, C., & Deng, F. (2020). How does China’s western development strategy affect
regional green economic efficiency? Science of the Total Environment, 707, Article
135939.