Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Indicators
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind

China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission efficiency evaluation, T

dynamic evolution and influencing factors
Ke-Liang Wanga, , Zhuang Miaob, Ming-Song Zhaoc, Cheng-Lin Miaod, Qun-Wei Wange
⁎

a
School of Economics, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, PR China
b
Institute of Development Studies, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 611130, PR China
c
School of Surveying and Mapping, Anhui University of Science and Technology, Huainan 232001, PR China
d
School of Economics and Management, Anhui University of Science and Technology, Huainan 232001, PR China
e
School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, PR China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: In recent years, air pollution situation becomes more severe and has seriously threatened sustainable economic
Total-factor air pollution emission efficiency development and public health in China. Combining the improved slacks-based measure (SBM) model, global
Dynamic evolution Malmquist-Luenberger (GML) productivity index and panel Tobit model, this paper investigates the regional
Influencing factors differences, dynamic evolution and influencing factors of China’s provincial air pollution emission efficiency
Improved SBM model
over the period 2006–2015 under the total-factor framework. Our results show that: (1) China’s total-factor air
GML productivity index
pollution emission efficiency is relatively low and exhibits significant regional differences; (2) technological
progress is the main contributor to ameliorate China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission efficiency;
(3) the total-factor air pollution emission efficiency gap between the higher- and the lower-efficient provinces
will probably widen in the future; (4) China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission efficiency is sig-
nificantly positive related to the level of economic development, industrial structure optimization, technological
innovation and foreign direct investment (FDI), is significantly negative related to the energy consumption
structure. The above results indicate that China has made remarkable achievements in improving regional total-
factor air pollution emission efficiency. However, there is considerable potential for further improvement. Policy
options for China’s regional total-factor air pollution emission efficiency improvement include but not limited to
optimizing industrial and energy consumption structure, promoting environmental technology innovation,
strengthening cooperation and exchange between different regions, deepening the reform of energy market and
energy pricing mechanism, actively introducing foreign investment, and further improving environmental
regulation level.

1. Introduction industrial structure, eliminating backward production capacity and

The extensive pattern of long-term economic development in China
has resulted in a significant decline in environmental quality, one
manifestation of which is the frequent occurrence and a large range of
serious haze weather throughout the country in recent years and has
attracted a great attention by society and academic experts (Chen et al.,
2013). In 2013, China had experienced the worst haze weather in the
past few decades, which affected 25 provinces and more than 100 large
and medium-size cities, with an average of 29.9 days of haze weather
throughout the year, seriously threatening China’s sustainable eco-
nomic development and public health (Wang et al., 2014; Ding et al.,
2017). In order to control air pollution effectively, China’s government
has formulated a series of targeted policies, including adjusting
controlling coal consumption, et al. However, due to the uneven re-
gional development in China, there are significant differences among
different regions in terms of economic development, resource endow-
ment, industrial structure, technical level, energy structure and others,
thereby the air pollution degree and emission reduction potential in
different regions are also significantly distinctive (Zhou and Zhou,
2017; Guo et al., 2018a,b). Therefore, it is meaningful to accurately
evaluate the China’s provincial air pollution emission efficiency and
systematically investigate its dynamic evolution and influencing fac-
tors, which are helpful for making out the targeted policies to realize
the win-win goals of China’s regional economic development and air
environmental protection.
Among the alternative efficiency measurement approaches, data

⁎
Corresponding author at: School of Economics, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China. Tel. +86 13955445740.
E-mail address: klwang@163.com (K.-L. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105578
Received 27 January 2019; Received in revised form 3 July 2019; Accepted 19 July 2019
Available online 24 July 2019
1470-160X/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K.-L. Wang, et al.
envelopment analysis (DEA) model first formally put forward by
Charnes et al. (1978) has been widely used in the past few decades.
Numerous studies have shown that DEA is an effective method for
evaluating the relative efficiency of decision-making units (DMUs) on
the condition of multiple inputs and multiple outputs with having no
need to assume any particular functional forms relating to input and
output (Song and Zheng, 2016), and has become the most commonly-
used method to measure energy and environmental efficiency (Song
et al., 2013). Hu and Wang (2006) first proposed a radial DEA model to
investigate total-factor energy efficiency (TFEE) of regions in China.
Since then, many subsequent researchers have utilized varied DEA
models to evaluate the total-factor energy and environmental efficiency
for different countries/regions/sectors (Wei et al., 2011; Wang et al.,
2012; Cui and Li, 2015; Wang et al., 2013c; Yang and Wang, 2013;
Honma and Hu, 2014; Chen et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2018). For in-
stance, Zaim and Taskin (2000) used the DEA method to measure the
environmental efficiency of Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) countries and investigated its influencing
factors. Zhou et al. (2008) used DEA approach to evaluate and compare
environmental efficiency among eight world areas. Zhang et al.
(2011a,b) applied DEA window method to investigate total-factor en-
ergy efficiency in 23 developing countries during the period of
1980–2005. Shi et al. (2010) utilized DEA models to evaluate China’s
provincial energy utilization efficiency and analyzed the energy-saving
potentials for different regions. Zhang et al. (2008) utilized a DEA
model to measure the environmental efficiency of China’s industries.
Gómez-Limón et al. (2012) used DEA approach and distance functions
to assess the eco-efficiency of a sample of 292 Andalusian olive farmers.
A common feature of the above studies is that they utilized the con-
ventional radial DEA models to evaluate efficiency, which requires
proportional changes in inputs and outputs, without taking input and
output slacks into account simultaneously, which could lead to biased
estimations and hence misleading policy implications (Zhang and Choi,
2013). In addition, the conventional DEA models are either input-or-
iented or output-oriented. In order to be more efficient, the input-or-
iented DEA models mainly concern how to reduce inputs and the
output-oriented DEA models mainly concern how to expand outputs. In
fact, inputs reduction and outputs expansion should be considered si-
multaneously. To sum up, there are several inherent defects within the
conventional radial DEA models. In response, Tone (2001) proposed the
standard slack-based measurement (SBM) model, which dealing with
input reduction and output expansion at the same time, and does not
stick to the proportionate change of input and output, which is more in
line with reality (Tao et al., 2016). However, the standard SBM model
ignores undesirable outputs, which are by-products associated with
economic output and should not be neglected when evaluating energy
and environmental efficiency (Wang et al., 2012). In order to provide a
more appropriate and reasonable efficiency measure, Tone (2004)
further proposed the improved SBM model considering the undesirable
outputs, which is widely applied in the efficiency measurement in-
corporating environmental pollution emissions and shows that it is
more accurate and reasonable than the standard SBM model. Zhou et al.
(2013) proposed a new non-radial DEA approach by integrating the
entropy weight and the improved SBM model and evaluated the en-
vironmental efficiency of the Chinese power industry at the provincial
level during 2005–2010. Deng et al. (2016) estimated water use effi-
ciency of 31 provinces in China during 2004–2013 using the improved
SBM model which took consideration of sewage. Zhang et al. (2017)
combined the improved SBM model and Malmquist productivity index
to evaluate and analyze the low-carbon economy efficiency in China.
Because air pollution is a by-product accompanied with economic
output during the production process, it has negative externality and
thus an undesirable output. Accordingly, it is appropriate to utilize the
above non-radial and non-oriented improved SBM model to build air
pollution emission efficiency evaluation model. Therefore, following
2
Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578
the above studies, we attempt to apply the improved SBM model to
estimate China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission static
efficiency (APESE) regarding air pollution emissions as the undesirable
outputs.
It should be noted that the above improved SBM model only can
measure the static efficiency for different DMUs at a specific period and
cannot provide dynamic evolution information on how efficiency
changes over different periods, nor does it acquire the driving factors of
efficiency change. To solve this problem, the productivity research
method is applied to measure the dynamic efficiency of air pollution
emission over different years in this paper. With respect to productivity
research method, among the estimation methods of environmentally
sensitive productivity growth, the Malmquist-Lenberger (ML) pro-
ductivity index proposed by Chung et al. (1997) has been widely used
in the existing studies (Färe et al., 2001; Kumar, 2006; Zhang et al.,
2011a,b; Wang et al., 2013a; Chen and Golley, 2014). The ML index
inherits the advantage of the traditional Malmquist index and can ef-
fectively deal with the productivity measurement of economic units
incorporating the undesirable outputs (Wang et al., 2013b). Un-
fortunately, however, the ML index based on contemporaneous pro-
duction possibility set (PPS) may encounter the problem of spurious
technical regress because it does not appropriately consider the nature
of technology (Oh and Heshmati, 2010; Fan et al., 2015) and it also has
the infeasibility problem when measuring cross-period directional dis-
tance function (Oh, 2010). To overcome these shortcomings, Oh and
Heshmati (2010) proposed the sequential Malmquist-Luenberger (SML)
productivity index with sequential PPS, which can avoid the spurious
technical regress. However, the SML index is still cannot completely
overcome the infeasibility problem and its geometric mean form ren-
ders it not circular. To fill this gap, Oh (2010) proposed the global
Malmquist-Luenberger (GML) productivity index by utilizing the global
PPS, which is circular and free from the infeasibility problem. In order
to obtain a more accurate estimate of China’s provincial total-factor air
pollution emission dynamic efficiency (i.e. air environmental sensitive
productivity), the GML productivity index is adopted in this paper and
the key driving factors of China’s total-factor air pollution emission
efficiency improvement also can be obtained by productivity decom-
position, which can provide a more detailed information for policy-
making.
The contributions of this study are as follows: (i) its introduction of
the improved SBM model considering undesirable outputs and GML
productivity index for China’s provincial air pollution emission effi-
ciency measurement under total-factor framework, providing a new
approach for investigating the performance of China’s regional air
pollution emission. To the best of our knowledge, none of the existing
studies did such work; (ii) its investigation of historical performance of
China’s provincial air pollution emission from static and dynamic per-
spectives, which provides an all-round and more detailed analysis fra-
mework for China’s regional total-factor air pollution emission effi-
ciency evaluation. This could help both the international scholars and
the Chinese government clarify the gains and losses in the course of air
pollution emission abatement of China’s each province and the four
major areas; and (iii) its presentation of the distributions, evolutions
and influencing factors of China’s regional total-factor air pollution
emission efficiency. This can not only help scholars understand the
current situation and changing trend of China’s regional total-factor air
pollution emission efficiency, but also can help the Chinese government
clarify what the focuses of their future air pollution control work are
and what the public can do to reduce air pollution.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the
research methods used in this study will be explained in detail. Section
3 provides the discussion and results. Conclusions will be drawn and
corresponding policy implications proposed in Section 4.
Because our paper involves a lot of abbreviations, we here sum-
marize them in Table 1.
K.-L. Wang, et al. Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Table 1 of the DMU, ranging from 0 to 1. If and only if = 1 and

Full names of abbreviations. S = S+ = S - = 0 , the DMU is SBM-efficient. If < 1, the DMU is in-
Abbreviation Full name efficient, and inputs and outputs need to be improved.

SBM Slacks-based measure

2.2. The global Malmquist-Luenberger (GML) productivity index
GML Global Malmquist-Luenberger
DEA Data Envelopment Analysis
FDI Foreign Direct Investment This GML index effectively overcomes the inherit defects of ML and
DMU Decision Making Unit SML index as it is constructed based on the global production tech-
TFEE Total Factor Energy Efficiency nology set. To better understand the definition of the GML index, two
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
types of the benchmark technology should be introduced: con-
ML Malmquist-Luenberger
PPS Production Possibility Set temporaneous benchmark and global benchmark.
SML Sequential Malmquist-Luenberger A contemporaneous benchmark technology is defined as
APESE Total-factor air pollution emission static efficiency Pt(xt) = {(yt,bt): xt can produce (yt, bt)}, where t = 1,…,T. The con-
APEDE Total-factor air pollution emission dynamic efficiency
temporaneous benchmark technology constructs a PPS at time t, which
EFFCH Change in efficiency
TECHCH Change in technology is built by the observations at that time only. By contrast, a global
TSCE Tons of standard coal equivalent benchmark technology is defined as P G (x ) = P1 (x ) P 2 (x ) ... PT (x ) ,
SO2 Sulfur dioxide which incorporates technology envelops all contemporaneous bench-
NOX Nitrogen oxides mark technologies by establishing a single reference PPS from a panel
DUST Smoke dust
data on inputs and outputs of relevant observations (Wang and Shen,
2016).
2. Methodology According to Oh(2010), we assume that a panel of k = 1,…,K DMUs
and s = 1,…,t,…,T time periods, the DMUs produce M desirable out-
2.1. The improved SBM model incorporating undesirable outputs puts, y RM +
and I undesirable outputs, b RI+, by utilizing N inputs,
x RN+ , and the global PPS is constructed from observations over the
whole period. Subsequently, we treat each China’s province as a DMU,
In order to overcome the defects of conventional radial DEA models,
then following the GML index method, the total-factor air pollution
Tone (2001) proposed a new DEA model called slacks-based measure
emission dynamic efficiency (APEDE) of province k0 between t and
(SBM). The difference between the SBM model and conventional radial
t + 1 is defined and decomposed as follows:
model is that the input or output slacks are directly incorporated into
the target function and can provide more reasonable and accurate ef- G
1 + D (xkt 0 , ykt 0 , bkt 0)
ficiency evaluation results. Additionally, the SBM model is character- APEDE t , t + 1 = EFFCH t , t + 1 × TECHCH t , t + 1 = G
ized with non-radial and non-oriented measurements, thus it avoids the 1 + D (xkt+0 1, ykt + 1 t+1
0 , bk 0 )
radial and oriented deviation, accurately reflecting the nature of effi- (3)
ciency. In addition, the practical production process is often accom-
t
panied by undesirable outputs such as air pollutants, wastewater, solid 1 + D (xkt0 , ykt 0 , bkt 0 )
waste and so on. Hence, Tone (2004) put forward an improved SBM EFFCH t , t + 1 = t+1
1+D (xkt+0 1, ykt+0 1 , bkt+0 1) (4)
model in the presence of undesirable outputs, which provides a novel
and effective tool for building the efficiency evaluation model in- G t
corporating environmental pollution. (1 + D (xkt 0 , ykt 0 , bkt 0 ))/(1 + D (xkt 0 , ykt 0 , bkt 0 ))
TECHCH t , t + 1 =
We assumed a production system with n DMUs. Each unit has three G
(1 + D (xkt+0 1, ykt+ 1 t+1
t+1
(xkt+0 1, ykt + 1 t+1
0 , bk 0 ))/(1 + D 0 , bk 0 ))
factors: inputs, desirable outputs, and undesirable outputs. Every unit
utilizes m inputs to produce s1 desirable outputs and s2 undesirable (5)
outputs, which are represented by three vectors: x Rm , Where the directional distance functionD (x , y , b)
G

y R s1, b R s2 . The matrics X , Y , B can be defined as follows: = max{ |(y + y , b b) P G (x )} , is defined on the global technology
X = (x1, x2 , ...,xm) Rm × n ,Y = (y1 , y2 , ...,yn ) Rs1× n , set PG; APEDEt,t+1 > 1 represents air pollution emission efficiency
B = (b1, b2 , ...,bn ) R s2× n . We assume that X > 0, Y > 0, B > 0 , then improvement from period t to t + 1, indicating that a production ac-
the PPS can be defined as tivity gets more economic outputs and less air pollution emissions;
P = {(x , y , b)|x X ,y Y ,b B , 0} (1) EFFCH is the efficiency change index, which measures the catching-up
effect of a province towards the contemporaneous frontier, and
where is the intensity vector. The three inequalities in the P EFFCHt,t+1 > 1 indicates that the province is approaching towards the
function stand for the situation when the actual input level is greater contemporaneous frontier over two periods; TECHCH is the technical
than the frontier level, the actual desirable output level is lower than change index, accounting for the best practice gap between the con-
the frontier desirable output level, and the actual undesirable output is temporaneous frontier and the global frontier between period t and
greater than the leading edge of the undesirable output level, respec- t + 1, and TECHCHt,t+1 > 1 corresponds to technical progress, and
tively (Zhou et al., 2018). vice versa. More specific details related the GML index can be found in
According to Tone (2004), the improved SBM model considering the Oh (2010), Fan et al. (2015).
undesirable outputs for evaluating efficiency of DMU (x 0 , y0 , b0) is as
follows:
3. Empirical results and discussion
1 m si
1 i=1 x
m
= min +
i0
3.1. Data
1 s1 sr s 2 sr
1+ r = 1 y + r = 1 br 0
s1 + s2 r0

s . t . x 0 = X + S , y0 = Y S+, b0 = B + S This study considers 30 provinces (including province, municipality

and autonomous region) in China as research subjects and the study
S 0, S + 0, S 0, 0 (2)
period is from 2006 to 2015. Since our research focuses on the air
where S , S denotes the slack in inputs, desirable outputs and
S +, - pollution emission efficiency of a regional economy, we choose the real
undesirable outputs. The target function value is the efficiency value GDP based on year 2006 as the only desirable output, as in many

3
K.-L. Wang, et al.
previous studies (Hu and Wang, 2006; Zhang et al., 2014). This study
also uses three classical inputs: capital, labor, and energy. Specifically,
capital stock, labor force and energy consumption are chosen as inputs,
and GDP and air pollution emissions are chosen as proxies of the de-
sirable output and the undesirable output, respectively. The data on
capital stock in 2006 prices are calculated according to the work of
Shan (2008) using the perpetual inventory method. The corresponding
equation is applied to estimating capital stock in our study:
K tj = I tj + (1 ) K tj 1, where K tj and K tj 1 denote the capital stock of the
jth province at time t and t-1, respectively. I tj represents the total vo-
lume of the investment in fixed assets at time t, and is the depreciation
rate. Data on the provincial labor force and GDP are collected from
China’s Statistical Yearbook (2007–2016). The data on total final en-
ergy consumption are collected from China’s Energy Statistical Year-
book (2007–2016) and units of all sorts of primary energy (such as coal,
oil, gas and electricity) are converted into tons of standard coal
equivalent (TSCE). Specific to the undesirable outputs, we select air
pollution emissions and regard Sulfur dioxide (SO2), Nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and Smoke dust (DUST) emissions as the typical representatives.
This is because these three air pollutants are important parts of China’s
air pollution and their official provincial data also can be directly ob-
tained from China Statistical Yearbook (2007–2016) and China’s En-
vironmental Statistical Yearbook (2007–2016). Table 2 presents the
summary statistics of inputs and outputs.
Based on geographical location, the China’s mainland provinces are
divided into four major areas: the eastern, central, western and north-
east areas (see Fig. 1). The eastern area consists of 10 provinces
(Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Fujian,
Guangdong and Hainan). The central region consists of 6 inland pro-
vinces (Shanxi, Henan, Anhui, Hubei, Hunan and Jiangxi). The western
region includes 11 provinces (Chongqing, Neimenggu, Qinghai, Xin-
jiang, Ningxia, Gansu, Shaanxi, Guizhou, Guangxi, Yunnan, Tibet and
Sichuan). The northeast area includes three provinces (Heilongjiang,
Jilin and Liaoning). The eastern region has the most developed
economy and the highest technical level compared with the other three
major areas. The central area has extensive industrial structure and is
China’s energy and manufacturing base, confronting the serious situa-
tion of energy saving and emission reduction. The western region
covers more than half of the China’s territory, has a comparatively
lower population density, and is the least developed area in China. The
northeast area, as China’s traditional industrial and manufacturing
base, is also facing the serious challenge of green economic transfor-
mation currently.
3.2. Empirical results
The proposed static and dynamic of total-factor air pollution emis-
sion efficiency indicators are applied to 30 provinces of China. The
total-factor air pollution emission static efficiency (APESE) of the pro-
vinces is first calculated from the improved SBM model of formula (2)
and then the total-factor air pollution emission dynamic efficiency
(APEDE) of the provinces is computed by the GML index from formula
(3)–(5).
Table 2
Summary statistics of inputs and outputs.
Variable Units Max Min Mean
Capital stock RMB Billion (2006) 151098.4 2430.83 36262.57
Labor Million workers 66.56 2.71 25.55
Energy Million tons of coal 38899.25 920.45 12932.92
Equivalent (Mtsce)
GDP RMB Billion (2006) 62473.09 648.5 13478.54
SO2 Million tons (Mt) 1.96 0.02 0.73
NOX Million tons (Mt) 1.801 0.04 0.64
DUST Million tons (Mt) 1.80 0.01 0.49
Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578
3.2.1. China’s provincial APESE evaluation and its regional differences
The results of China’s provincial total-factor APESE calculated by
the improved SBM model are presented in Table 3. The figure reveals
that China’s provincial total-factor APESE was relatively low with the
average score of 0.4898 during 2006–2015, indicating that China
emitted a large volume of air pollutants in the process of economic
development. As for three specific air pollutants, the results show that
the average SO2-specific, NOX-specific and DUST-specific efficiency
scores in China are 0.4797, 0.5133 and 0.4641, respectively, of which
NOX shows the highest efficiency, followed by SO2, and DUST is the
lowest. To clearly present the feature of its spatial differences, we have
mapped the geographical spatial distribution of APESE in China, as
shown in Fig. 2, where the deeper the color represents the higher the
efficiency, the lighter the color, the lower the efficiency.
Fig. 2 visually shows the significant spatial differences of overall
APESE value and three specific APESE values among China’s provinces.
With regard to overall APESE, it can be seen that Beijing, Shanghai and
Guangdong exhibit the deepest color and locate at the production
frontier with the average efficiency score of 1 over time, implying that
they are the best practitioners of air pollution control in China. Tianjin
also exhibits a relatively high APESE with the score of 0.7655. In ad-
dition, it can be found that there are only four provinces with the
average score ranged from 0.70 to 1.00, while the remaining 26 pro-
vinces’ scores are lower than 0.70. The average scores of 14 provinces,
such as Anhui, Chongqing, Liaoning and Jilin, are between 0.40 and
0.70. However, the scores of Ningxia, Guizhou, Qinghai, Shaanxi and
other 12 provinces are lower than 0.40, of which Ningxia exhibits the
lowest score of 0.2095. This indicates that improving these backward
provinces’ APESE is the key to promoting China’s overall APESE. Fur-
thermore, it also can be observed in Fig. 2 that, being consistent with
China’s overall APESE indicator, the three specific APESE indicators also
display the feature of significant spatial differences, indicating that
there exist great air pollution emissions reduction potentials in China.
From four major areas perspective, as displayed in Fig. 3, during
2006–2015, the APESE average scores of the eastern, central, western
and northeast areas are 0.7197, 0.4147, 0.3325 and 0.4504, respec-
tively, of which the eastern area shows the highest efficiency, the other
three areas are all lower than the national average, and the western
area exhibits the lowest score of 0.3325. It is known to all that the
central, western and northeast areas have lagged significantly behind
the eastern area since the reform and opening up in China in terms of
economic development, technical innovation, infrastructure construc-
tion, and human capital level, which may be positively related to re-
gional total-factor air pollution emission efficiency. As expected, it can
be inferred that there exists quantitatively positive correlation between
China’s regional APESE and economic growth, the more economically
developed the region, the higher the APESE, and vice versa. Therefore,
promoting the backward areas’ economic development is of great sig-
nificance to improving China’s overall total-factor APESE.
3.2.2. China’s provincial APEDE evaluation and its driving factors
In this section, this paper investigates the dynamic evolution feature
of China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission efficiency using
GML productivity index from 2006 to 2015, and further decomposes it
into two components: efficiency change (EFFCH) and technical change
(TECHCH), to reveal the driving factors of China’s provincial APEDE.
Utilizing formulas (3)–(5), we calculate the total-factor APEDE and its
Std.Dev components of China’s each province during 2006–2015, and the re-
sults are shown in Table 4 and Fig. 4.
28008.91
16.842 The results show that China’s average APEDE of 30 provinces during
8067.31 2006–2015 is 1.0237, indicating that China’s air pollution emissions
efficiency has increased by 2.37% annually. This means that the con-
11580.02 tradiction between air environmental protection and economic growth
0.43
has been coordinated in China in the past few years. This could be at-
0.42
0.34 tributed to several new development strategies and targeted policies
put forward by the Chinese government in recent years. Such as, the
4
K.-L. Wang, et al. Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Fig. 1. Geographical location map of China’s four major areas.

Table 3
The total-factor APESE of China’s 30 provinces.
Province 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Average

Beijing 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
Tianjin 1.0000 0.7977 0.8127 0.7958 0.8018 0.6826 0.6734 0.6797 0.7024 0.7089 0.7655
Hebei 0.3805 0.3894 0.3968 0.3873 0.3959 0.3769 0.3676 0.3613 0.3622 0.3529 0.3771
Shanxi 0.3240 0.3352 0.3291 0.3175 0.3190 0.3161 0.3072 0.2962 0.2928 0.2753 0.3112
Neimenggu 0.4001 0.4074 0.3980 0.3913 0.3738 0.3754 0.3605 0.3553 0.3582 0.3391 0.3759
Liaoning 0.4692 0.4838 0.4657 0.4591 0.4552 0.4424 0.4296 0.4278 0.4265 0.4088 0.4468
Jilin 0.4563 0.4720 0.4531 0.4363 0.4193 0.4079 0.4096 0.4096 0.4041 0.3948 0.4263
Heilongjiang 0.4908 0.5002 0.5138 0.5103 0.5120 0.4739 0.4608 0.4524 0.4430 0.4223 0.4780
Shanghai 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
Jiangsu 0.7274 0.7263 0.7393 0.7258 0.7115 0.6636 0.6636 0.6554 0.6614 0.6550 0.6929
Zhejiang 0.7049 0.6934 0.6989 0.6643 0.6671 0.6429 0.6499 0.6228 0.6273 0.6225 0.6594
Anhui 0.3827 0.3947 0.4043 0.4109 0.4154 0.4067 0.4131 0.4194 0.4244 0.4124 0.4084
Fujian 0.6830 1.0000 1.0000 0.6501 0.6265 0.5853 0.5745 0.5663 0.5389 0.5159 0.6741
Jiangxi 0.4601 0.4656 0.4792 0.4878 0.4905 0.4621 0.4759 0.4771 0.4791 0.4616 0.4739
Shandong 0.5592 0.5857 0.6041 0.5886 0.5788 0.5249 0.5137 0.5250 0.5197 0.5085 0.5508
Henan 0.3951 0.3980 0.4002 0.3918 0.3905 0.3801 0.3834 0.3844 0.3722 0.3614 0.3857
Hubei 0.4347 0.4414 0.4575 0.4569 0.4653 0.4361 0.5283 0.4516 0.4436 0.4335 0.4549
Hunan 0.3920 0.5537 0.4933 0.4498 0.4355 0.4265 0.4423 0.4562 0.4472 0.4435 0.4540
Guangdong 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
Guangxi 0.3909 0.3963 0.3966 0.3907 0.3776 0.3748 0.3757 0.3707 0.3624 0.3540 0.3789
Hainan 0.5402 0.5192 0.5272 0.5177 0.5355 0.4649 0.4496 0.4268 0.4025 0.3931 0.4777
Chongqing 0.3419 0.3617 0.3804 0.3859 0.3959 0.4298 0.4354 0.4689 0.4739 0.4767 0.4151
Sichuan 0.4384 1.0000 0.4820 0.4050 0.4071 0.4303 0.4523 0.4681 0.4611 0.4450 0.4989
Guizhou 0.2051 0.2040 0.2246 0.2270 0.2323 0.2519 0.2593 0.2724 0.2772 0.2670 0.2421
Yunnan 0.2964 0.2986 0.2991 0.3003 0.2987 0.2889 0.2910 0.3041 0.2959 0.2832 0.2956
Shaanxi 0.3685 0.3915 0.3948 0.4057 0.4100 0.3929 0.4106 0.3874 0.3910 0.3773 0.3930
Gansu 0.2868 0.2966 0.2998 0.2982 0.2979 0.2945 0.3059 0.3105 0.3140 0.3008 0.3005
Qinghai 0.2420 0.2494 0.2606 0.2613 0.2590 0.2501 0.2398 0.2267 0.2235 0.2103 0.2423
Ningxia 0.2146 0.2193 0.2281 0.2201 0.2112 0.2084 0.2054 0.1997 0.1991 0.1888 0.2095
Xinjiang 0.3460 0.3368 0.3341 0.3272 0.3165 0.3067 0.2904 0.2702 0.2709 0.2582 0.3057

‘11th-Five-Year’ Plan (2006–2010) first proposed the energy con-
servation and emission reduction targets in 2006; the 17th National
Congress of the Communist Party of China first proposed the strategy of
‘ecological civilization construction’ in 2007; China’s State Council
presented the national action plan on air pollution prevention and
control in 2013, and so on. Undoubtedly, the effective implementations
of these new strategies and targeted policies have played crucial
impacts on promoting China’s total-factor air pollution emission effi-
ciency. As can be seen in Table 4, the average scores of China’s pro-
vincial EFFCH and TECHCH indicators from 2006 to 2015 are 0.9926
and 1.0314, respectively. This means that technical progress is the key
driving force of China’s provincial air pollution emission efficiency
improvement, whereas efficiency deterioration has been the biggest
obstacle to air pollution control in China during the period.

5
K.-L. Wang, et al.
Fig. 2. Spatial distribution of overall and specific total-factor APESE in China.
Fig. 3. The average total-factor APESE of major areas in China.
Regarding the efficiency evolution trend, as shown in Fig. 4, during
2006–2015, China’s overall APEDE showed a downward first and then
upward trend, and the lowest score was in 2010–2011, while the EFFCH
index exhibited a downward trend in most years, the peak appeared in
2008–2009. On the contrary, the TECHCH index maintained an upward
trend over time and is the key factor to boosting China’s air pollution
emission efficiency. Specific to China’s each province, it can be found
from Table 4, the APEDE is improved in most provinces expect for
Neimenggu, Guizhou and Gansu from 2006 to 2015, of which Beijing
shows the highest growth rate of 12.9%. Additionally, as many as 20
provinces’ EFFCH scores are less than 1, implying that the efficiency
deterioration is the major obstacle to China’s air pollution emission
efficiency promotion. By contrast, except for Guizhou and Gansu,
China’s other 28 provinces’ TECHCH scores are more than 1, which also
indicates technical progress is the main contributor to ameliorate
China’s air pollution emission efficiency. It is noteworthy that, during
the study period, the EFFCH and TECHCH indicators changed toward
6
Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578
completely opposite directions, which inevitably exert great negative
impacts on China’s air pollution emission efficiency improvement. As a
result, it is of great importance to driving the two forces to jointly
promote the total-factor air pollution emission efficiency in China’s
future air pollution control work.
3.2.3. China’s provincial APEDE evaluation and its decompositions from
specific air pollutants perspective
In order to investigate China’s provincial total-factor APEDE more
systematically, we further calculate and decompose it from three spe-
cific air pollutants perspective, as shown in Table 5.
Table 5 presents China’s provincial total-factor APEDE and its
components from the three specific air pollutants perspective. The fig-
ures show that in most provinces, the APEDE indices of the three spe-
cific air pollutants all kept downward trend during 2006–2015, among
which the average scores of SO2, NOX and DUST are 1.0202, 1.0208 and
1.0186, respectively, showing the good results achieved by China’s air
pollution control in recent years. Furthermore, based on the decom-
position results, it can be seen in Table 5 that the average EFFCH scores
of SO2, NOX and DUST are 0.9995, 0.9931 and 0.9999, respectively,
while theirs average TECHCH scores are 1.0207, 1.0279 and 1.0186,
respectively. This demonstrates technical progress rather than effi-
ciency promotion is the dominant driving force of China’s provincial
APEDE, which is consistent with the conclusions above.
3.2.4. China’s provincial APEDE investigation from four major areas
perspective
The above results show that there are significant regional differ-
ences in China’s total-factor APESE, so is the feature of China’s pro-
vincial total-factor APEDE similar to APESE? To answer this question,
K.-L. Wang, et al. Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Table 4
The total-factor APEDE and its components of China’s 30 provinces.
Province APEDE EFFCH TECHCH Province APEDE EFFCH TECHCH

Beijing 1.1290 1.0000 1.1290 Hubei 1.0377 1.0112 1.0262

Tianjin 1.0412 0.9976 1.0437 Hunan 1.0224 0.9855 1.0375
Hebei 1.0208 1.0034 1.0174 Guangdong 1.0282 1.0000 1.0282
Shanxi 1.0030 0.9919 1.0112 Guangxi 1.0091 0.9649 1.0458
Neimenggu 0.9863 0.9740 1.0127 Hainan 1.0338 0.9529 1.0849
Liaoning 1.0009 0.9873 1.0138 Chongqing 1.0447 1.0054 1.0390
Jilin 1.0235 0.9899 1.0339 Sichuan 1.0055 0.9728 1.0337
Heilongjiang 1.0108 0.9982 1.0126 Guizhou 0.9887 1.0010 0.9877
Shanghai 1.0645 1.0000 1.0645 Yunnan 1.0118 0.9760 1.0367
Jiangsu 1.0445 1.0004 1.0441 Shaanxi 1.0289 0.9965 1.0325
Zhejiang 1.0428 0.9966 1.0464 Gansu 0.9830 1.0195 0.9642
Anhui 1.0312 1.0067 1.0243 Qinghai 1.0090 0.9965 1.0126
Fujian 1.0198 0.9755 1.0454 Ningxia 1.0037 0.9897 1.0141
Jiangxi 1.0345 0.9972 1.0374 Xinjiang 1.0048 0.9919 1.0130
Shandong 1.0263 0.9998 1.0265 Average 1.0237 0.9926 1.0314
Henan 1.0317 0.9987 1.0330 – – – –

next, this subsection further investigates the regional difference,

changing trend and driving factors of total-factor APEDE for China’s
four major areas.
From Table 6, it can be found that China’s APEDE have been sig-
nificantly improved both from overall and specific pollutants perspec-
tive during 2006–2015, and the regional differences are also very dis-
tinctive in China’s four major areas, which is consistent with the feature
of APESE. In terms of overall pollutants perspective, the average annual
growth rates of APESE in China’s eastern, central, western and north-
east areas during 2006–2015 are 4.46%, 2.67%, 1.17% and 0.67%,
respectively, and the eastern area is significantly higher than that of the
Fig. 4. The trends of China’s total-factor APEDE and its components.
other three areas, as well as from the three specific pollutants per-
spective. In the light of decomposition results, it can be observed that

Table 5
The APEDE and its components of China’s 30 provinces from specific air pollutants perspective.
Province SO2 NOX DUST

APEDE EFFCH TECHCH APEDE EFFCH TECHCH APEDE EFFCH TECHCH

Beijing 1.1247 1.0000 1.1247 1.0938 1.0000 1.0938 1.1025 1.0000 1.1025
Tianjin 1.0401 1.0089 1.0310 1.0412 0.9976 1.0437 1.0342 1.0089 1.0251
Hebei 1.0138 1.0034 1.0105 1.0208 1.0034 1.0174 1.0138 1.0034 1.0105
Shanxi 1.0030 0.9919 1.0112 1.0030 0.9919 1.0112 1.0030 0.9919 1.0112
Neimenggu 0.9863 0.9740 1.0127 0.9863 0.9740 1.0127 0.9863 0.9740 1.0127
Liaoning 1.0009 0.9873 1.0138 1.0009 0.9873 1.0138 1.0009 0.9873 1.0138
Jilin 1.0235 0.9899 1.0339 1.0235 0.9899 1.0339 1.0235 0.9899 1.0339
Heilongjiang 1.0064 0.9982 1.0082 1.0108 0.9982 1.0126 1.0064 0.9982 1.0082
Shanghai 1.0597 1.0000 1.0597 1.0450 1.0000 1.0450 1.0545 1.0000 1.0545
Jiangsu 1.0434 1.0004 1.0430 1.0445 1.0004 1.0441 1.0434 1.0004 1.0430
Zhejiang 1.0409 0.9966 1.0445 1.0428 0.9966 1.0464 1.0409 0.9966 1.0445
Anhui 1.0312 1.0067 1.0243 1.0312 1.0067 1.0243 1.0312 1.0067 1.0243
Fujian 1.0286 0.9884 1.0407 1.0197 0.9755 1.0453 1.0286 0.9884 1.0407
Jiangxi 1.0342 0.9972 1.0371 1.0345 0.9972 1.0374 1.0342 0.9972 1.0371
Shandong 1.0187 1.0030 1.0156 1.0263 0.9998 1.0265 1.0187 1.0030 1.0156
Henan 1.0309 0.9987 1.0322 1.0317 0.9987 1.0330 1.0309 0.9987 1.0322
Hubei 0.9961 1.0120 0.9843 1.0377 1.0112 1.0262 0.9939 1.0120 0.9821
Hunan 1.0037 1.0182 0.9858 1.0222 0.9855 1.0373 1.0037 1.0182 0.9858
Guangdong 1.0141 1.0000 1.0141 1.0028 1.0000 1.0028 1.0194 1.0000 1.0194
Guangxi 1.0264 0.9857 1.0413 1.0091 0.9649 1.0458 1.0264 0.9857 1.0413
Hainan 1.0363 0.9529 1.0876 1.0249 0.9672 1.0597 1.0179 0.9672 1.0525
Chongqing 1.0606 1.0270 1.0328 1.0447 1.0054 1.0390 1.0606 1.0270 1.0328
Sichuan 0.9606 1.0138 0.9476 1.0045 0.9728 1.0326 0.9606 1.0138 0.9476
Guizhou 0.9817 1.0361 0.9476 0.9887 1.0010 0.9877 0.9817 1.0361 0.9476
Yunnan 1.0315 1.0026 1.0288 1.0118 0.9760 1.0367 1.0315 1.0026 1.0288
Shaanxi 1.0361 0.9987 1.0374 1.0289 0.9965 1.0325 1.0361 0.9987 1.0374
Gansu 0.9661 1.0195 0.9476 0.9830 1.0195 0.9642 0.9661 1.0195 0.9476
Qinghai 1.0106 0.9965 1.0142 1.0090 0.9965 1.0126 1.0106 0.9965 1.0142
Ningxia 1.0037 0.9897 1.0141 1.0037 0.9897 1.0141 1.0037 0.9897 1.0141
Xinjiang 1.0048 0.9919 1.0130 1.0048 0.9919 1.0130 1.0048 0.9919 1.0130
Average 1.0202 0.9995 1.0207 1.0208 0.9931 1.0279 1.0186 0.9999 1.0186

7
K.-L. Wang, et al. Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Table 6 The first map of Fig. 5 presents the classification on basis of the overall
The total-factor APEDE and its components of China’s four major areas. APESE and APEDE of each China’s province. It can be found that there
Index Eastern area Central area Western area Northeast area are seven provinces located in the ‘H/H’ group, including Beijing,
Tianjin, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shandong and Guangdong. We
APEDE 1.0446 1.0267 1.0067 1.0117 also find that these provinces are come from developed coastal areas,
EFFCH 0.9925 0.9985 0.9897 0.9918
static efficiency and dynamic efficiency are both higher than the
TECHCH 1.0525 1.0282 1.0172 1.0200
average, and are the leaders in terms of air pollution control. Relative to
SO2 the provinces’ average, however, 14 provinces are in the ‘L/L’ group,
APEDE 1.0416 1.0164 1.0058 1.0102
EFFCH 0.9952 1.0041 1.0031 0.9918
meaning those provinces are relatively inefficiency and have a lower
TECHCH 1.0466 1.0123 1.0027 1.0186 dynamic efficiency growth rate. These provinces include Hebei, Shanxi,
Neimenggu, Jilin, Liaoning, Heilongjiang, Hunan, Guangxi, Guizhou,
NOX
APEDE 1.0359 1.0267 1.0066 1.0117 Yunnan, Gansu, Qinghai, Ningxia and Xinjiang. In addition, we find
EFFCH 0.9940 0.9985 0.9897 0.9918 that three northeast provinces and most central and western provinces
TECHCH 1.0422 1.0282 1.0171 1.0200 all locate in this group, whose static efficiency and dynamic efficiency
DUST are both lower than the average. This indicates that these provinces
APEDE 1.0371 1.0160 1.0058 1.0102 have two disadvantages simultaneously and are the representatives of
EFFCH 0.9967 1.0041 1.0031 0.9918 China’s backward provinces in terms of air pollution prevention and
TECHCH 1.0405 1.0119 1.0027 1.0186
control. It can be found in Fig. 5 that Anhui, Henan, Jiangxi, Hubei,
Hainan, Chongqing and Shaanxi are in ‘L/H’, and Fujian and Sichuan
the APEDEs of China’s four major areas are almost completely driven by locate in ‘H/L’ group, on basis of which we can also investigate the
technological progress rather than efficiency improvement. Ad- advantages and disadvantages of these provinces in promoting air
ditionally, from Table 6, it can also be found that the four TECHCHs of pollution emission efficiency. Furthermore, according to the second,
the eastern area are 5.25%, 4.66%, 4.22% and 4.05%, respectively, are third and fourth map of Fig. 5, we can also find the advantages and
all significantly higher than that of the other three major areas. This disadvantages for China’s 30 provinces in improving air pollution
indicates that there may be serious market segmentation and factors emission efficiency from the perspective of specific air pollutants.
separation between different areas in China, thereby hindering the According to the results above, we have found an interesting phe-
technology diffusion and knowledge spillover between China’s four nomenon that most provinces in China are in the two group of ‘H/H’
major areas, and resulting in the distinctive APEDE in different regions. and ‘L/L’, whether based on overall pollutant or specific pollutant
In addition, according to the figures presented in Table 6, un- perspectives. This indicates that those provinces with higher efficiency
fortunately, as the leader of air environmental protection in China, the also have faster efficiency growth rates, while those provinces with
eastern area was also confronting the dilemma of efficiency deteriora- lower efficiency have slower efficiency growth rates, which may
tion during the study period, which is in line with the other three major eventually result in widening of the efficiency gap between advanced
areas. Hence, aim to control air pollution more effectively, the eastern provinces and backward provinces.
areas should pay more attention on the improvement of technical ef-
ficiency in its future air pollution control work. 3.2.6. Analysis of the influencing factors of China’s provincial total-factor
air pollution emission efficiency
To propose targeted policies to effectively control China’s regional
3.2.5. The advantages and disadvantages for improving China’s provincial air pollution, it is necessary to systematically investigate the influen-
total-factor air pollution emission efficiency cing factors of China’s total-factor air pollution emission efficiency.
The previous subsection illustrates the results of China’s provincial Based on experiences and previous study conclusions, and considering
total-factor APESE and APEDE from the static and dynamic perspective, data availability, we select the following influencing factors:
respectively. However, it is noteworthy to consider provinces’ total-
factor APESE and APEDE simultaneously. Therefore, the following (1) Economic development. This study uses per capita GDP expressed at
analysis focus on China’s provinces’ static efficiency and dynamic effi- constant 2006 prices to reflect the economic development level of
ciency of air pollution emission in order to obtain more detailed in- China’s each province and logarithmic it to reduce the data het-
sights related provinces’ advantages and disadvantages of improving erogeneity.
total-factor air pollution emission efficiency. (2) Industrial structure. This study takes the proportion of the tertiary
First, we utilize China’s provincial average APESE and APEDE to industry output to the GDP in each province to represent its in-
build a matrix for each air pollutant. According to Chang et al. (2012), dustrial structure.
China’s 30 provinces can now be classed into one of the following four (3) Energy consumption structure. This study uses the proportion of coal
categories: provinces in the first category (labeled as H/H) present a consumption to the total energy consumption in each province as its
higher APEDE and better APESE, indicating these provinces have ad- structure of energy consumption.
vantage of eliminating specific air pollutants. Provinces in the second (4) Energy price. This study uses the fuel power price index of each
category (labeled as L/H) present a better APESE, but a lower APEDE, province as the energy price.
which means that these provinces will confront a threat from control- (5) Technological innovation. This study takes the proportion of R&D
ling specific air pollutants, the reason for which is that their APEDE are expenditure to the GDP in each province to represent the variable of
slower than the country’s average. Although provinces in the second technical progress in China.
category have better APESE, they may be caught up by rapidly growing (6) Foreign direct investment (FDI). This study uses the proportion of
provinces. Provinces in the third category (labeled as L/L), presenting a foreign direct investment to the GDP in each province to represent
slower APEDE and lower APESE. Provinces in the fourth category (la- the variable of foreign direct investment, for the purpose of testing
beled as H/L), with lower APESE but higher APEDE, indicating these the ‘pollution shelter’ hypothesis.
provinces may acquire an advantage of improving specific air pollu- (7) Environmental regulation. This study uses the proportion of sewage
tants emission efficiency to challenge more efficient provinces in the charges income to the industrial value added in each province to
future. represent the variable of environmental regulation.
In the light of the above definitions, Fig. 5 shows the calculation and (8) Regional differences. This study uses dummy variables to describe
classification results. We next discuss some major findings as follows. the feature of China’s regional differences. When the dummy

8
K.-L. Wang, et al. Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578

Fig. 5. The advantages and disadvantages of improving total-factor air pollution emission efficiency of China’s 30 provinces.

variable is 1, it represents the eastern area and 0 of the other three total-factor APEDE equation. From Table 7, the regression results are
major areas. shown as follows:

The data of above variables are collected from China Statistical
Yearbook (2007–2016), China Energy Statistical Yearbook
(2007–2016), China Environmental Statistical Yearbook (2007–2016),
China Statistical Yearbook of Science and Technology (2007–2016) and
China Foreign Economic Statistics Yearbook (2007–2016), respectively.
Since total-factor APESE value ranges from 0 to 1, belongs to the
truncated dependent variable, thereby we adopt panel Tobit model to
investigate the influencing factors of China’ provincial total-factor
APESE. As for total-factor APSDE, we utilize panel data econometric
model to resolve it. Table 7 presents the regression results.
Based on Hausman test, we use fix effect panel model to estimate
(1) The results show that economic development has significantly po-
sitive effects on both China’s provincial total-factor APESE and
APEDE and that it passes the significance test when the significance
level is 1%. The possible explanation is that economic development
has raised China’s public willingness of air environmental protec-
tion in recent years, and the Chinese government can also obtain
more funds for air pollution control simultaneously (Zhou et al.,
2014; Guo et al., 2017).
(2) The results show that increasing tertiary industries proportion plays
significantly positive impacts on both China’s provincial total-factor
APESE and APEDE, and that it passes the significance test at 5%

Table 7
The regression results.
Independent Variables APESE APEDE

Coefficients t statistic P value Coefficients t statistic P value

*** ***
Economic development 1.2390 3.2190 0.0014 1.0421 2.8782 0.0043
Industrial structure 0.5641** 2.2295 0.0265 0.2450*** 2.5440 0.0115
Energy consumption structure −0.2374** −2.2418 0.0257 −0.0459*** −2.6986 0.0074
Energy prices 0.0529* 1.7932 0.0740 0.0323 1.3245 0.1865
Technological innovation 1.5489*** 5.3283 0.0000 2.4326*** 3.9458 0.0001
Foreign direct investment 0.7851** 2.5675 0.0107 0.5412*** 2.6321 0.0090
Environmental regulation −0.0145 −1.3246 0.1863 0.0726* 1.4529 0.0818
Regional differences 0.3213*** 3.5692 0.0004 0.2478*** 2.8905 0.0042
Constants 1.2306*** 3.2703 0.0012 0.5867** 2.3155 0.0214
R2 0.2769 0.3047

*** ** *
, , and represent significant levels of 1%, 5% and 10%, respectively.

9
K.-L. Wang, et al.
level. It is known to all that the tertiary industry is mainly com-
posed of service sectors, of which fossil energy consumption and air
pollution emissions are significantly smaller than energy and en-
vironmental-intensive heavy industries. Therefore, optimizing in-
dustrial structure is one of the important ways to improve China’s
air environmental quality (Chen et al., 2017; Li and Lin, 2017).
(3) The results show negative coefficients of energy consumption
structure in two regression equations above through the test at the
significance level of 5%. This shows that increasing coal con-
sumption proportion is significantly not conducive to total-factor
air pollution emission efficiency improvement in China. As the most
important conventional energy in China, the coal consumption
proportion in the country’s total energy consumption has remained
at around 70% for a long time, resulting in a large volume of air
pollution emissions, which has become the main cause of frequent
haze weather in China in recent years (Ding et al., 2017; Guo et al.,
2018a,b). Hence, optimizing energy consumption structure by re-
ducing the proportion of coal consumption is a key measure to
improve air environmental quality in China (Chang and Hu, 2010).
(4) The regression results show that raising energy prices play positive
effects on China’s provincial total-factor APESE and APEDE, but the
impact is relatively small, not passing the test of 5% significant
levels, may be due to the current Chinese government’s strict ad-
ministrative control of energy prices, energy prices are distorted,
cannot reflect the real supply-demand relationship of energy mar-
kets (Du et al., 2016). Hence, it is imperative for the Chinese gov-
ernment to push forward energy marketization reform to form a
scientific energy pricing mechanism.
(5) The regression results show that increasing R&D expenditure is
conducive to China’s provincial total-factor APESE and APEDE, and
that it passes the test of 5% significant levels. To some extent, R&D
expenditure reflects a country’s level of technological innovation
(Fan et al., 2015; Wang and Ma, 2018). Therefore, increasing R&D
expenditure and promoting technological innovation in the domain
of air pollution control will significantly improve China’s air en-
vironmental quality.
(6) The regression results show that foreign direct investment (FDI)
exerts significantly positive effects on China’s provincial total-factor
APESE and APEDE and that it passes the test of 5% significant le-
vels. This means that the ‘pollution shelter’ hypothesis in terms of
air pollution emissions is not established in China, as foreign direct
investment has brought advanced air pollution control technologies
and management experiences to China, thus promoting total-factor
air pollution emission efficiency.
(7) The results show that environmental regulation does not play sig-
nificant positive impacts on China’s provincial total-factor APESE
and APEDE, not passing the test of 5% significant levels, which may
be due to the current relatively low environmental regulation in-
tensity in China (Zhang et al., 2011a,b). Because we use the pro-
portion of sewage charges income to the industrial value added to
represent the variable of environment regulation, which to some
extent indicates that China’s current sewage charging system has
some shortcomings, more stringent redesign is needed.
(8) The results show that regional differences have significant impacts
on China’s provincial total-factor APESE and APEDE and that it
passes the test of 5% significant levels. This means that compared
with the other three major areas, the eastern area has an absolute
advantage in terms of geographical location, economic strength and
technical level, thus being the leader of air pollution control in
China (Sun et al., 2018).
4. Conclusions and policy implications
4.1. Conclusions
This study attempted to combine the improved SBM model and GML
10
Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578
productivity index to estimate the total-factor air pollution emission
efficiency of 30 provinces in China during the period 2006–2015 based
on the static and dynamic perspectives, respectively, and further in-
vestigated its dynamic evolution features and influencing factors. The
main conclusions are as follows:
(1) During 2006–2015, China’s average provincial total-factor APESE
was 0.4898, the value is relatively low and exhibits significant
spatial difference, and the efficiency of the eastern area is sig-
nificantly higher than that of the other three major areas.
(2) China’s provincial average total-factor APEDE was 1.0239 during
the sample period, indicating that China’s total-factor air pollution
emission efficiency improved at an average annual rate of 2.39%
over time. Whether from the overall or specific air pollutants per-
spective, provincial total-factor air pollution emission efficiency is
driven by technical progress rather than efficiency promotion in
China.
(3) On basis of the analysis of advantages and disadvantages in im-
proving China’s provincial total-factor air pollution emission effi-
ciency, it is found that most China’s provinces are in the ‘H/H’ and
‘L/L’ group, meaning that the air pollution emission efficiency gap
between China’s provinces might probably continue to widen in the
future.
(4) The influencing factors regression results reveal that economic de-
velopment, optimizing industrial structure, technological innova-
tion, introducing foreign direct investment (FDI) and regional dif-
ferences are significantly related to China’s provincial total-factor
APESE and APEDE, whereas increasing coal consumption propor-
tion hinders China’s total-factor air pollution efficiency, and the
impacts of energy prices and environmental regulation are not
significant.
4.2. Policy implications
According to the findings above, some policy implications are pro-
posed to improving China’s total-factor air pollution emission effi-
ciency.
(1) With the deepening of China’s industrialization and urbanization
process, energy and environmental constraints will be more severe,
a large range of haze weather cannot be eliminated completely in
the short term in China. Therefore, energy conservation and emis-
sion reduction should be emphasized as the prior for China in its
future work, to effectively promote air pollution prevention and
control.
(2) In order to narrow the regional total-factor air pollution emissions
efficiency gap, on the one hand, the central and western provinces
should actively introduce advanced equipment and technologies
from eastern China. This will require the further elimination of
barriers (e.g., trade and resource barriers) between China’s different
regions. On the other hand, due to the lower economic development
level, it is of great importance for the China’s government to pro-
vide its policies and funding support for the central and western
provinces. Only in this way can the central and western provinces
bridge the air pollution emission efficiency gap and catch up to the
eastern provinces
(3) Chinese government should take industrial restructuring as the es-
sential way of future air pollution control. Through the elimination
of backward production capacity, improving the economic growth
quality, and developing strategic emerging industries and modern
service industries to boost China’s air quality.
(4) China’s energy consumption structure needs to be further optimized
for better air pollution emission efficiency. Obviously, the adjust-
ment of energy consumption structure depends on the substitution
between coal and other energy sources. To effectively promote
China’s air quality, more efforts should be made to realize the
K.-L. Wang, et al.
energy substitution between coal and clean energy resource.
(5) To boost the level of environmental regulation, it is of considerable
necessity to redesign China’s current sewage charging system more
strictly, making enterprises to form the endogenous powers toward
energy conservation and emission reduction.
What’s more, deepening the reform of energy market and energy
price is also imperative in China. The marketization of energy prices
will take advantage of market mechanism to enhance energy con-
servation and air pollution emission reduction. In addition, we should
fully make use of the advantages of foreign direct investment (FDI) in
terms of the energy conservation and emission reduction technology
and environmental management, thereby promoting China’s total-
factor air pollution emission efficiency through spillover effect.
Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71403003). The
China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Nos. 2014M55187 and
2015T80643) and the Anhui Philosophy Social Science Planning
Project (No. AHSKY2018D92).
References
Chang, T.P., Hu, J.L., 2010. Total-factor energy productivity growth, technical progress,
and efficiency change: an empirical study of China. Appl. Energy 87, 3262–3270.
Chang, T.P., Hu, J.L., Chou, R.Y., Sun, L., 2012. The sources of bank productivity growth
in China during 2002–2009: a disaggregation view. J. Bank. Finance 36, 1997–2006.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E., 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making
units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 6 (2), 429–444.
Chen, J., Song, M., Xu, L., 2015. Evaluation of environmental efficiency in China using
data envelopment analysis. Ecol. Ind. 52, 577–583.
Chen, N., Xu, L., Chen, Z., 2017. Environmental efficiency analysis of the Yangtze River
Economic Zone using super efficiency data envelopment analysis and tobit models.
Energy 134, 659–671.
Chen, R.J., Wang, X., Meng, X., Jing, H., Zhou, Z.J., Chen, B.H., Kan, H.D., 2013.
Communicating air pollution-related health risks to the public: an application of the
air quality health index in Shanghai. Environ. Int. 51 (1), 168–173.
Chen, S.Y., Golley, J., 2014. Green productivity growth in China’s industry economy.
Energy Econ. 44, 89–98.
Chung, Y.H., Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., 1997. Productivity and undesirable outputs: a di-
rectional distance function approach. J. Environ. Manage. 51, 229–240.
Cui, Q., Li, Y., 2015. An empirical study on the influencing factors of transportation
carbon efficiency: evidence from fifteen countries. Appl. Energy 141, 209–217.
Deng, G., Li, L., Song, Y., 2016. Provincial water use efficiency measurement and factor
analysis in China: based on SBM-DEA model. Ecol. Ind. 69, 12–18.
Ding, L., Liu, C., Chen, K., Huang, Y., Diao, B., 2017. Atmospheric pollution reduction
effect and regional predicament: an empirical analysis based on the Chinese pro-
vincial NOX emissions. J. Environ. Manage. 196, 178–187.
Du, H., Matisoff, D.C., Wang, Y., Liu, X., 2016. Understanding drivers of energy efficiency
changes in China. Appl. Energy 184, 1196–1206.
Fan, M., Shao, S., Yang, L., 2015. Combining global Malmquist-Luenberger index and
generalized method of moments to investigate industrial total factor CO2 emission
performance: a case of Shanghai (China). Energy Policy 79, 189–201.
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Pasurka, C.A., 2001. Accounting for air pollution emissions in
measures of state manufacturing productivity growth. J. Regional Sci. 41 (3),
381–409.
Gómez-Limón, J.A., Picazo-Tadeo, A.J., Reig-Martínez, 2012. Eco-efficiency assessment
of olive farms in Andalusia. Land Use Policy 29, 395–406.
Guo, Q., Wang, J., Yin, H., Zhang, G., 2018a. A comprehensive evaluation of regional
atmospheric environmental carrying capacity: model development and a case study
in China. Ecol. Ind. 91, 259–267.
Guo, X., Zhu, Q., Lv, L., Chu, J., Wu, J., 2018b. Efficiency evaluation of regional energy
saving and emission reduction in China: a modified slacks-based measure approach.
J. Cleaner Prod. 140, 1313–1321.
Honma, S., Hu, J.L., 2014. Industry-level total-factor energy efficiency in developed
countries: a Japan-centered analysis. Appl. Energy 119 (15), 67–78.
Hu, J.L., Wang, S.C., 2006. Total factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy
Policy 34 (17), 3206–3217.
Kumar, S., 2006. Environmentally sensitive productivity growth: a global analysis using
11
Ecological Indicators 107 (2019) 105578
Malmquist-Luemberger index. Ecol. Econ. 56, 280–293.
Li, K., Lin, B.Q., 2017. Economic growth model, structural transformation, and green
productivity in China. Energy 187, 489–500.
Oh, D., 2010. A global Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index. J. Prod. Anal. 34,
183–197.
Oh, D., Heshmati, A., 2010. A sequential Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index: en-
vironmentally sensitive productivity growth considering the progressive nature of
technology. Energy Econ. 32 (6), 1345–1355.
Shan, H.J., 2008. Re-estimating the capital stock of China: 1952–2006. J. Quantit.
Technol. Econ. 10, 17–31.
Song, M., Song, Y., Yu, H., Wang, Z., 2013. Calculation of China’s environmental effi-
ciency and relevant hierarchical cluster analysis from the perspective of regional
differences. Math. Comput. Modell. 58, 1084–1094.
Song, M., Zheng, W., 2016. Computation analysis of thermoelectric enterprises’ en-
vironmental efficiency and Bayesian estimation of influence factors. Social Sci. J. 53
(1), 88–99.
Sun, J., Wang, Z., Li, G., 2018. Measuring emission-reduction and energy-conservation
efficiency of Chinese cities considering management and technology heterogeneity. J.
Cleaner Prod. 175, 561–571.
Tone, K., 2001. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. Eur. J.
Oper. Res. 130 (3), 498–509.
Tone, K., 2004. Dealing with undesirable outputs in DEA: A slacks-based measure (SBM)
approach, Presentation at NAPW iii, Toronto.
Wang, K., Wei, Y.M., Zhang, X., 2012. A comparative analysis of China’s regional energy
and emission performance: which is the better way to deal with undesirable output?
Energy Policy 46, 574–584.
Wang, Q.W., Zhao, Z.Y., Zhou, P., Zhou, D.Q., 2013a. Energy efficiency and production
technology heterogeneity in China: a meta-frontier DEA approach. Econ. Model. 35,
283–289.
Wang, S., Ma, Y., 2018. Influencing factors and regional discrepancies of the efficiency of
carbon dioxide emissions in Jiangsu, China. Ecol. Indic. 90, 460–468.
Wang, S.X., Xing, J., Zhao, B., Jang, C., Hao, J.M., 2014. Effectiveness of national air
pollution control policies on the air quality in metropolitan areas of China. J.
Environ. Sci. 26, 13–22.
Wang, Y., Ma, W., Tu, W., Zhao, Q., Yu, Q., 2013b. A study on carbon emissions in
Shanghai 2000–2008, China. Environ. Sci. Policy 27, 151–161.
Wang, Y., Shen, N., 2016. Environmental regulation and environmental productivity: the
case of China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 62, 758–766.
Wang, Y.S., Xie, B.C., Shang, L.F., Li, W.H., 2013c. Measures to improve the performance
of China’s thermal power industry in view of cost efficiency. Apply Energy 112,
1078–1086.
Wei, C., Ni, J., Shen, M., 2011. China’s energy inefficiency: a cross-country comparison.
Social Sci. J. 48, 478–488.
Yang, L., Wang, K.L., 2013. Regional differences of environmental efficiency of China’s
energy utilization and environmental regulation cost based on provincial panel data
and DEA method. Mathem. Comp. Model. 58, 1074–1083.
Yang, L., Wang, K.L., Geng, J.C., 2018. China’s regional ecological energy efficiency and
energy-saving and pollution abatement potential: an empirical analysis utilizing ep-
silon-based model measure. J. Cleaner Prod. 194, 300–308.
Zhang, B., Bi, J., Fan, Z., Ge, J., 2008. Eco-efficiency analysis of industrial system in
China: a data envelopment analysis approach. Ecol. Econ. 68 (1), 306–316.
Zhang, C.H., Liu, H.Y., Bressers, H.T., Buchanan, K.S., 2011a. Productivity growth and
environmental regulations-accounting for undesirable outputs: analysis of China’s
thirty provincial regions using the Malmquist-Luenberger index. Ecol. Econ. 70,
2369–2379.
Zhang, J., Zeng, W., Wang, J., Yang, F., Jiang, H., 2017. Regional low-carbon economy
efficiency in China: analysis based on the Super-SBM model with CO2 emissions. J.
Cleaner Prod. 163, 202–211.
Zhang, N., Choi, Y., 2013. Total-factor carbon emissions performance of fossil fuel power
plants in China: a metafrontier non-radial Malmquist index analysis. Energy Econ. 40,
549–559.
Zhang, N., Kong, F., Choi, Y., 2014. Measuring sustainability performance for China: a
sequential generalized directional distance function approach. Econ. Model. 41,
392–397.
Zhang, X.P., Cheng, X.M., Yuan, J.H., Gao, X.J., 2011b. Total-factor energy efficiency in
developing countries. Energy Policy 39, 644–650.
Zhou, C., Shi, C., Wang, S., Zhang, D., 2018. Estimation of eco-efficiency and its influ-
encing factors in Guangdong province based on Super-SBM and panel regression
models. Ecol. Ind. 86, 67–80.
Zhou, P., Ang, B.W., Poh, K.L., 2008. Measuring environmental performance under dif-
ferent environmental DEA technologies. Energy Econ. 30 (1), 1–14.
Zhou, P., Sun, Z.R., Zhou, D.Q., 2014. Optimal path for controlling CO2 emissions in
China: a perspective of efficiency analysis. Energy Econ. 45, 99–110.
Zhou, Y., Xing, X., Fang, K., Liang, D., Xu, C., 2013. Environmental efficiency analysis of
power industry in China based on an entropy SBM model. Energy Policy 57, 68–75.
Zhou, Y.J., Zhou, J.X., 2017. Urban atmospheric environmental capacity and atmospheric
environmental carrying capacity by GDP-PM2.5. Ecol. Ind. 73, 637–652.