Are Poverty Alleviation and Carbon Reduction Parallel Paths? Empirical Research on the Interaction Between Poverty Alleviation and Carbon Emissions

Abstract

Consolidating the results of poverty alleviation and achieving carbon neutrality are serious challenges for global sustainable development, and it is essential to explore the relationship between these goals, and then offer scientific responses. Based on the panel data of 30 provinces in China from 2010 to 2019, this paper conducted the 2SLS model by compromising the merits of the Regression Discontinuity principle with the STIRPAT model to study the interaction between poverty alleviation and carbon reduction. The study found that: (1) the implementation of poverty alleviation aggravates the problem of carbon emissions, and the main mechanism is that poverty alleviation promotes consumption and production by increasing the wealth of farmers, thereby increasing carbon emissions. (2) Carbon reduction weakens the achievement of poverty alleviation significantly, but the mitigation effect presents an “inverted U”-shaped curve, which first increases and then wanes. (3) Farmers' income and the development of rural transportation play a role in acting on the negative effects of carbon reduction. By integrating poverty theory and energy management, this article reveals the complex relationship between two important policies in China and offers relevant policy recommendations, which will not only promote the advancement of rural revitalization but also promote global sustainable development.

Keywords

poverty alleviation rural vitalization carbon reduction green technology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahmad

Khan

Rahman

Z. U.

Khattak

S. I.

Khan

Z. U.

(2021). Can innovation shocks determine CO2 emissions (CO2e) in the OECD economies? A new perspective. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 30(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1684643

Ajmi

A. N.

Hammoudeh

Nguyen

D. K.

Sato

J. R.

(2015). On the relationships between CO2 emissions, energy consumption and income: the importance of time variation. Energy Economics, 49, 629–638.

Ardakani

M. K.

Seyedaliakbar

S. M.

(2019). Impact of energy consumption and economic growth on CO2 emission using multivariate regression. Energy Strategy Reviews, 26, 100428.

Baye

F. M.

(2006). Growth, redistribution and poverty changes in cameroon: A shapley decomposition analysis. Journal of African economies, 15(4), 543–570.

Bourguignon

Bussolo

da Silva

(2008). The impact of macroeconomic policies on poverty and income distribution: macro-micro evaluation techniques and tools. World Bank Publications.

bp Statistical Review of World Energy. (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html

Chen

Ravallion

(2010). The developing world is poorer than we thought, but no less successful in the fight against poverty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(4), 1577–1625. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2010.125.4.1577

Chen

Zhang

Qin

(2018). Agricultural greenhouse gas emissions at county level in Jiangsu Conformation Study of Dual Stimuli-Responsive Core-Shell Diblock Polymer Brushesrovince: Temporal and spatial differences and trend evolution. Polymers, 10(10), 1084–1094. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym10101084

Chen

Zhao

Lai

Wang

Xia

(2019). Exploring the effects of economic growth, and renewable and non-renewable energy consumption on China’s CO2 emissions: Evidence from a regional panel analysis. Renewable energy, 140, 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.03.058

10.

Dai

Yu.

(2019). An empirical study on the impact of China’s economic growth on rural poverty alleviation. Economic Mathematics, 36(4), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.16339/j.cnki.hdjjsx.2019.04.011

11.

Farajian

Moghaddasi

Hosseini

(2018). Agricultural energy demand modeling in Iran: Approaching to a more sustainable situation. Energy Reports, 4, 260–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2018.03.002

12.

Fünfgelt

Schulze

G. G.

(2016). Endogenous environmental policy for small open economies with transboundary pollution. Economic Modelling, 57, 294–310.

13.

Gelenbe

Caseau

(2015). The impact of information technology on energy consumption and carbon emissions. Ubiquity, 2015(June), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2755977

14.

Grossman

G. M.

Krueger

A. B.

(1991). Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. Working Paper No. 3914. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

15.

Hamit-Haggar

(2012). Greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption and economic growth: A panel cointegration analysis from Canadian industrial sector perspective. Energy Economics, 34(1), 358–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.06.005

16.

Hausman

Stock

J. H.

Yogo

(2005). Asymptotic properties of the Hahn–Hausman test for weak-instruments. Economics Letters, 89(3), 333–342.

17.

Pan

Huang

(2020). Quantity or quality? The impacts of environmental regulation on firms’ innovation–Quasi-natural experiment based on China’s carbon emissions trading pilot. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 158, 120122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120122

18.

Hua

Ran

Xie

(2022). China’s poverty alleviation policy promoted ecological-economic collaborative development: Evidence from poverty-stricken counties on the Qinghai-tibet plateau, 1–18.

19.

Jaunky

V. C.

(2011). The CO2 emissions-income nexus: Evidence from rich countries. Energy Policy, 39(3), 1228–1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.050

20.

Yang

(2020). Problems and improvement paths of my country's expenditure-based poverty relief policy.

21.

Jin

Guo

Deng

(2020). Is there a decoupling relationship between CO2 emission reduction and poverty alleviation in China? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119856.

22.

Johnson

Franzluebbers

A. J.

Weyers

S. L.

Reicosky

D. C.

Franzluebbers

A. J.

Weyers

S. L.

(2007). Agricultural opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987), 150(1), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.06.030

23.

Karakaya

Bostan

Özçağ

(2019). Decomposition and decoupling analysis of energy-related carbon emissions in Turkey. Environmental science and pollution research international, 26(31), 32080–32091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-06359-5

24.

Kasman

Duman

Y. S.

(2015). CO2 emissions, economic growth, energy consumption, trade and urbanization in new EU member and candidate countries: a panel data analysis. Economic modelling, 44, 97–103.

25.

Khavul

Bruton

G. D.

Bruton

(2013). Harnessing Harnessing Innovation for Change: Sustainability and Poverty in Developing Countries: Innovation, Sustainability, and Povertynnovation for change: Sustainability and poverty in developing countries. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01067.x

26.

Shi

(2018). China’s rural poverty and the anti-poverty strategies in the 21st century. Economic Science Press.

27.

(2020). From absolute poverty to relative poverty: The dynamic evolution of rural poverty in China. J. South. China Norm. Univ, 6, 30–43.

28.

Zhou

Ren

(2012). An analysis of the poverty reduction effect of economic growth and income distribution——taking xinjiang as an example. 8–11. https://doi.org/10.16011/j.cnki.jjwt.2012.02.010

29.

Liu

Lan

(2023). The effect of China’s leading officials’ accountability audit of natural resources policy on provincial agricultural carbon intensities: The mediating role of technological progress. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(3), 5634–5661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22465-3

30.

Luo

Weiying

(2020). Decomposition of China's poverty dynamics: 1991-2015 (pp. 27–40). Management World.

31.

Mendola

(2007). Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: A propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh. Food Food Policyolicy, 32(3), 372–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.07.003

32.

Ming

Hong

(2015). Spatial Convergence and Differentiation of China’s Agricultural Carbon Emission Performance: An Empirical Analysis Based on Malmquist luenberger Index and Spatial Measurement. Econ. Geogr, 35, 142–148.

33.

Ran

Hua

(2022). Does China’s poverty alleviation policy improve the quality of the ecological environment in poverty-stricken areas? Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 2554. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1067339

34.

Ran

Xie

Hua

(2023). How to break the environment-economic trap in rocky desertification contiguous poverty-stricken areas: the mediating effect of industrial structure upgrading. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 1–15.

35.

Ravallion

(2020). On the origins of the idea of ending poverty (No. w27808). National Bureau of Economic Research.

36.

Ravallion

Chen

(2007). China's (uneven) progress against povertygainst Poverty[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 82(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2005.07.003

37.

Roslyakova

(2019). The Spreading of the Indirect Effects as the Condition for the Realization Public Interests of Regional Developmentpreading of the indirect effects as the condition for the realization public interests of regional development [J]. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 272(3), 032139. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/272/3/032139

38.

Roy

Basu

Pal

(2017). Examining the driving forces in moving toward a low carbon society: Examining the driving forces in moving toward a low carbon society: an extended STIRPAT analysis for a fast growing vast economyn extended STIRPAT analysis for a fast growing vast economy. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 19(9), 2265–2276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-017-1416-z

39.

Tian

Zhang

Yin

(2014). China’s agricultural carbon emission distribution dynamics and trend evolution——based on the panel data analysis of 31 provinces (cities, districts) from 2002 to 2011. Chinese J Popul Resour Environ, 24(7), 91–98.

40.

Tubiello

F.N.

Salvatore

Cóndor Golec

R.D.

Ferrara

Rossi

Biancalani

Flammin

, et al. (2014). Agriculture, forestry and other land use emissions by sources and removals by sinks1990–2011 analysis. FAO Statistics Division. Working Paper Series ESS/14-02. Retrived from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/019/i3671e/i3671e.pdf> (accessed 24.10.14).

41.

Wang

(2019). Promotion of degraded land consolidation to rural poverty alleviation in the agro-pastoral transition zone of northern China. Land Use Policy, 88, 104114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104114

42.

Na.

Wang

(2018). Carbon emission EKC test and decoupling relationship analysis of countries along the “Belt and Road”. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 8(6), 671–678.

43.

Yang

Thompson

J. R.

(2014). China: Shale gas is a fraught solution to emissions. Nature, 513(7518), 315. https://doi.org/10.1038/513315e

44.

Yin

(2019). From eliminating absolute poverty to alleviating relative poverty: China’s poverty reduction process and poverty reduction strategy after 2020.

45.

York

Rosa

E. A.

Dietz

(2003). STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impactsnalytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts. Ecological Ecological Economicsconomics, 46(3), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8009(03)00188-5

46.

Zhang

Liao

Zhou

(2022). Analysis of regional differences and dynamic mechanisms of agricultural carbon emission efficiency in China’s seven agricultural regions. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(25), 38258–38284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16661-w

47.

Zhang

Wang

Hao

Liu

(2021). Shooting two hawks with one arrow: could China’s emission trading scheme promote green development efficiency and regional carbon equality? Energy Economics, 101, 105412.

48.

Zhang

Qi.

Yang

Kong

(2020). Exploration and reflection on the mechanism of relatively poor groups after 2020.

49.

Zhang

Chen

Wang

Wen

Chen

(2023). Will carbon trading reduce spatial inequality? A spatial analysis of 200 cities in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 325(Pt A), 116402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116402

50.

Zhou

Wang

(2019). Examining the influences of urbanization on carbon dioxide emissions in the Yangtze River Delta, China: Kuznets curve relationship. Science of the Total Environment, 675, 472–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.269

51.

Zhou

Liu

(2016). Does population have a larger impact on carbon dioxide emissions than income? Evidence from a cross-regional panel analysis in China. Applied Energy, 180, 800–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.035

52.

Zhu

Liu

(2014). Going green or going away: Environmental regulation, economic geography and firms’ strategies in China’s pollution-intensive industries. Geoforum, 55, 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.05.004

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.35 MB