As the largest carbon emitter in the world, China has been looking for ways to transform itself into a low-carbon society and a carbon neutral country. The launch of its low-carbon city pilot (LCCP) policy is one of these important measures. So far, there were three batches of LCCP, which were issued in July 2010 (LCCP-1), December 2012 (LCCP-2), and January 2017 (LCCP-3), respectively. However, little attention had been paid on the outcomes between different batches of LCCP. In this study, using a municipal-level panel data from 2007 through 2016, we investigated LCCP’s heterogeneous effects on carbon abatement, air quality, and neighboring cities’ environmental governance by applying robust staggered difference-in-difference analysis and estimation. We found that both LCCP-1 and LCCP-2 contributed to carbon abatement, this potentially mediated by industrial structure adjustment and green innovation, respectively. However, LCCP-1 worsened air quality in the pilot cities and had a negative impact on carbon emission reductions in neighboring cities, limiting its contribution. Meanwhile, we found that LCCP-2 reduced carbon emissions in not only pilot cities but also neighboring cities. Altogether, our results reveal the importance and necessity of accurately identifying outcomes and issues when studying policy, and stress the call for local managers to pay greater attention to fairness issues in environmental governance.
BaronRKennyD (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51: 1173–1182.
2.
CaiHChenYGongQ (2016) Polluting thy neighbor: unintended consequences of China’s pollution reduction mandates. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management76: 86–104.
3.
CallawayBSant’AnnaP (2021) Difference-in-differences with multiple time periods. Journal of Econometrics225: 200–230.
4.
ChenSChenD (2018) Air pollution, government regulations and high-quality economic development. Economic Research Journal2: 20–34 (in Chinese).
5.
ChenZKahnMLiuY, et al. (2016) The Consequences of Spatially Differentiated Water Pollution Regulation in China. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research No. 22507.
6.
ChenYLiPLuY (2018) Career concerns and multitasking local bureaucrats: evidence of a target-based performance evaluation system in China. Journal of Development Economics133: 84–101.
7.
ChenJGaoMChengS, et al. (2020) County-level CO2 emissions and sequestration in China during 1997–2017. Scientific Data7: 391.
8.
ChengJYiJShengD, et al. (2019) Can low-carbon city construction facilitate green growth? Evidence from China’s pilot low-carbon city initiative. Journal of Cleaner Production231: 1158–1170.
9.
CopelandBTaylorM (1995) Trade and transboundary pollution. The American Economic Review85: 716–737.
10.
CopelandBTaylorM (2004) Trade, growth and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature42: 7–71.
11.
de ChaisemartinCD’HaultfœuilleX (2020) Two-way fixed effects estimators with heterogeneous treatment effects. The American Economic Review110: 2964–2996.
12.
DoblingerCSuranaKAnadonL (2019) Governments as partners: the role of alliances in U.S. cleantech startup innovation. Research Policy48: 1458–1475.
13.
DuLWeiCCaiS (2012) Economic development and carbon dioxide emissions in China: provincial panel data analysis. China Economic Review23: 371–384.
14.
DuvivierCXiongH (2013) Transboundary pollution in China: a study of polluting firms’ location choices in Hebei province. Environment and Development Economics18: 459–483.
15.
GlaeserEKahnM (2010) The greenness of cities: carbon dioxide emissions and urban development. Journal of Urban Economics67: 404–418.
16.
Goodman-BaconA (2021) Difference-in-differences with variation in treatment timing. Journal of Econometrics225: 254–277.
17.
HuoWQiJYangT, et al. (2022) Effects of China’s pilot low-carbon city policy on carbon emission reduction: a quasi-natural experiment based on satellite data. Technological Forecasting and Social Change175: 121422.
18.
JiangT (2022) Mediating effects and moderating effects in causal inference. China Industrial Economics5: 100–120 (in Chinese).
19.
KellerW (2002) Trade and the transmission of technology. Journal of Economic Growth7: 5–24.
20.
KhannaNFridleyDHongL (2014) China’s pilot low-carbon city initiative: a comparative assessment of national goals and local plans. Sustainable Cities and Society12: 110–121.
21.
KostkaG (2016) Command without control: the case of China’s environmental target system. Regulation & Governance10: 58–74.
22.
LiXXingH (2024) Better cities better lives: how low-carbon city pilots can lower residents’ carbon emissions. Journal of Environmental Management351: 119889.
23.
LiMLiuHGengG, et al. (2017) Anthropogenic emission inventories in China: a review. National Science Review4: 834–866.
24.
LiXYangXWeiQ, et al. (2019) Authoritarian environmentalism and environmental policy implementation in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling145: 86–93.
25.
LiZBaiTTangC (2022) How does the low-carbon city pilot policy affect the synergistic governance efficiency of carbon and smog? Quasi-experimental evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production373: 133809.
26.
LiZLaiACaoY, et al. (2024) Porter effect vs cost effect: the impact of China’s low carbon city pilot on carbon emissions and economic performance. Journal of Environmental Management360: 121015.
27.
LinBJiaH (2022) Does the development of China’s high-speed rail improve the total-factor carbon productivity of cities?Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment105: 103230.
28.
LiuJDengX (2011) Impacts and mitigation of climate change on Chinese cities. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability3: 188–192.
29.
LiuXLiYChenX, et al. (2022) Evaluation of low carbon city pilot policy effect on carbon abatement in China: an empirical evidence based on time-varying DID model. Cities123: 103582.
30.
LuoYLiuLWangD, et al. (2024) Low-carbon city pilot policy and enterprise low-carbon innovation–a quasi-natural experiment from China. Economic Analysis and Policy83: 204–222.
31.
LyuJLiuTCaiB, et al. (2023) Heterogeneous effects of China’s low-carbon city pilots policy. Journal of Environmental Management344: 118329.
32.
PengYBaiX (2018) Experimenting towards a low-carbon city: policy evolution and nested structure of innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production174: 201–212.
33.
PorterMVan der LindeC (1995) Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. The Journal of Economic Perspectives4: 97–118.
34.
QianHXuSCaoJ, et al. (2021) Substantial climate co-benefit potentials for air pollution embedded in China’s industrial firms. Nature Sustainability4: 417–425.
35.
QiuSWangZLiuS (2021) The policy outcomes of low-carbon city construction on urban green development: evidence from a quasi-natural experiment conducted in China. Sustainable Cities and Society66: 102699.
36.
RafajPSchoeppWRussP, et al. (2013) Co-benefits of post-2012 global climate mitigation policies. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change18: 801–824.
37.
ShiLWangYJingL (2024) Low-carbon city pilot, external governance, and green innovation. Finance Research Letters67: 105768.
38.
SongMZhaoXShangY (2020) The impact of low-carbon city construction on ecological efficiency: empirical evidence from quasi-natural experiments. Resources, Conservation and Recycling157: 104777.
39.
TangHLiuJWuJ (2020) The impact of command-and-control environmental regulation on enterprise total factor productivity: a quasi-natural experiment based on China’s “two control zone” policy. Journal of Cleaner Production254: 120011.
40.
VerhoefENijkampP (2002) Externalities in urban sustainability: environmental versus localization-type agglomeration externalities in a general spatial equilibrium model of a single-sector monocentric industrial city. Ecological Economics40: 157–179.
41.
WangYNiuYLiM, et al. (2022) Spatial structure and carbon emission of urban agglomerations: spatiotemporal characteristics and driving forces. Sustainable Cities and Society78: 103600.
42.
WenZYeB (2014) Analyses of mediating effects: the development of methods and models. Advances in Psychological Science22: 731–745 (in Chinese).
43.
YiLZhouYLiZ, et al. (2018) Analysis of the effects of driving restriction policies in controlling haze pollution. China Population, Resources and Environment28: 81–87 (in Chinese).
44.
YiHZhaoLQianY, et al. (2022) How to achieve synergy between carbon dioxide mitigation and air pollution control? Evidence from China. Sustainable Cities and Society78: 103609.
45.
YuYZhangN (2021) Low-carbon city pilot and carbon emission efficiency: quasi-experimental evidence from China. Energy Economics96: 105125.
46.
ZhangBZhaoD (2023) Emission leakage and the effectiveness of regional environmental regulation in China. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management121: 102869.
47.
ZhangPCaiWYaoM, et al. (2020) Urban carbon emissions associated with electricity consumption in Beijing and the driving factors. Applied Energy275: 115425.
48.
ZhangZZhangJFengY (2021) Assessment of the carbon emission reduction effect of the air pollution prevention and control action plan in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health18: 13307.
49.
ZhangMHongYZhuB (2022) Does national innovative city pilot policy promote green technology progress? Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production363: 132461.
50.
ZhangHMariaCGhezelayaghB, et al. (2024) Climate policy in emerging economies: evidence from China’s low-carbon city pilot. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management124: 102943.
51.
ZhaoXLynchJChenQ (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research37: 197–206.
52.
ZhaoLYuanLYangY, et al. (2021) A cooperative governance model for SO2 emission rights futures that accounts for GDP and pollutant removal cost. Sustainable Cities and Society66: 102657.
53.
ZhuCLeeC (2022) The effects of low-carbon pilot policy on technological innovation: evidence from prefecture-level data in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change183: 121955.
