This study investigates how clean coal technology affects output and employment based on panel models for the 31 regions in China, the largest coal producer and consumer in the world, during 2000–2012. The results show that the coal consumption structure has positive effects on output and insignificant negative effects on employment, while carbon emission intensity has strong negative effects on both. These results provide evidence that the spread of clean coal technology, which can reduce carbon emissions without diminishing coal consumption, is an effective way in which to stimulate output and employment. Further, both productivity improvement and the upgrading of the industrial structure have strong positive effects on output and employment. Therefore, China should provide preferential policies and encourage the entry of private capital to stimulate enterprise development, further accelerating the spread of clean coal.
SongM.L.WuJ.WangY.M., Reducing energy demand in China: a statistical analysis of urban energy consumption in Anhui province, Energy & environment, 2012, 23(1), 17–32.
2.
ErnstR.B.ChristensenL.R., The Internal Structure of Functional Relationships: Separability, Substitution, and Aggregation, The Review of Economic Studies, 1973, 40, 403–410.
3.
EdwardB.B.MarkandyaAnilDavidW.P., Environmental sustainability and cost-benefit analysis, Environ Plann A, 1990, 22(9), 1259–1266.
4.
SoytasU.SariR.Energy consumption and GDP: causality relationship in G-7 countries and emerging markets, Energy economics, 2003, 25.1, 33–37.
5.
Lee Chien-Chiang and Chun-Ping Chang, Energy consumption and economic growth in Asian economies: A more comprehensive analysis using panel data, Resource and Energy Economics, 2008, 30, 50–65.
6.
TuckerM., Carbon dioxide emissions and global GDP, Ecological Economics, 1995, 15.3, 215–223.
7.
CoondooD.DindaS., Causality between income and emission: a country group-specific econometric analysis, Ecological Economics, 2002, 40 (3), 351–367.
8.
SoytasUgurSariRamazanEwingBradley T., Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States, Ecological Economics, 2007, 62.3, 482–489.
9.
SaidiKaisHammamiSami, The impact of energy consumption and CO2 emissions on economic growth: Fresh evidence from dynamic simultaneous-equations models, Sustainable Cities and Society, 2015, 14, 178–186.
10.
WangX.H.LiuY., China's energy consumption and economic growth: a study based on the cointegration analysis and Granger causality test, Resources Science, 2007, 29, 57–62(in Chinese(.
11.
LeeC.C.ChangC.P.ChenP.F., Energy-income causality in OECD countries revisited: the key role of capital stock, Energy Ecnomics, 2008, 30, 2359–2373.
12.
ZhaoJ. W., The intrinsic relationship between economic growth and energy consumption, Economic Study (Chinese Journal), 2007, 8, 31–42.
13.
LauL SChoongC KEngY K, Carbon dioxide emission, institutional quality, and economic growth: Empirical evidence in Malaysia, Renewable Energy, 2014, 68, 276–281.
14.
AndersonE., A place on the corner, 2nd ed., The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2003.
15.
KivyiroPendoArminenaHeli, Carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, and foreign direct investment: Causality analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa, Energy, 2014, 74, 595–606.
16.
SayyedM.Z., Effects of financial development indicators on energy consumption and CO2 emission of European, East Asian and Oceania countries, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015, 42, 752–759.
17.
KraftJ.KraftA., On the Relationship between Energy and GNP, Energy Development, 1978, 3, 401–403.
18.
AkarcaA. T.LongT. V., Energy and employment: A time series analysis of the causal relationship, Resources and Energy, 1979, 2, 151–162.
19.
AkarcaA. T.LongT. V., On the relationship between energy and GNP: A re-examination, Journal of Energy and Development, 1980, 5, 326–331.
20.
YuE.S.H.ChoiP.C.Y.ChoiJ.Y., The relationship between energy and employment: are-examination, Energy Systems Policy, 1988, 11, 278–295.
21.
ErolU.YuE. S. H., Spectral Analysis of the Relationship between Energy Consumption, Employment and Business Cycles, Resources and Energy, 1989, 11, 395–412.
22.
YuE. S. H.JinJ. C., Cointegration tests Of Energy Consumption, Income and Employment, Resources and Energy, 1992, 14.3, 259–266.
23.
MarxA., Ecological Modernization, Environmental Policy and Employment: Can Environmental Protection and Employment be Reconciled?European Journal of Social Science, 2000, 13, 311–325.
24.
ILO. Green Policies and Jobs: A Double Dividend? In ILO (ed.), the Global Jobs Crisis and Beyond, World of Work Report2009, Geneva 22, Switzerland.
25.
RogerH.B.RobertM.WendlingPaula DiPerna, Environmental protection, the economy, and jobs: national and regional analysis, Journal of Environmental Management, 2008, 86.1, 63–79.
26.
MarxA., Ecological Modernization, Environmental Policy and Employment, Can Environmental Protection and Employment be Reconciled?Innovation, 2010, 13.3, 311–325.
27.
WilliamA.B.TaylorM.S., Economic growth and the environment: a review of theory and empirics. Handbook of economic growth II, Durlauf, S. Elsevier, 2005, 1749–1821.
28.
SoytasU.SariR.EwingB.T., Energy consumption, income, and carbon emissions in the United States, Ecological Economics, 2007, 62(3–4), 482–489.
29.
LapolaD MMartinelliL APeresC APervasive transition of the Brazilian land-use system, Nature climate change, 2014, 4(1), 27–35.
30.
HurlinC.BaptisteV., Granger causality tests in panel data models with fixed coefficients, Cahier de Recherche EURISCO, Université Paris IX Dauphine, 2001, 9.
