Environmental decentralization and innovation in China

Feng, Suling; Sui, Bo; Liu, Huimin; Li, Guoxiang

doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2020.02.048

Cited by 56 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Feng et al . (2020) differ by showing a higher level of environmental decentralization of the local province has a negative spillover effect on green technology innovation in neighbouring provinces, whereas Zhang and Li (2020) find that environmental decentralization reduces the green technology innovation effect of environmental protection investments. Wu et al .…”

Section: Environmental Federalismmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Both Feng et al . (2020) and Zhang and Li (2020) provide evidence that environmental decentralization is able to promote green technology innovation. Feng et al .…”

Section: Environmental Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both Feng et al (2020) and Zhang and Li (2020) provide evidence that environmental decentralization is able to promote green technology innovation. Feng et al (2020) differ by showing a higher level of environmental decentralization of the local province has a negative spillover effect on green technology innovation in neighbouring provinces, whereas Zhang and Li (2020) find that environmental decentralization reduces the green technology innovation effect of environmental protection investments. Wu et al (2020b) demonstrate that China's environmental decentralization promotes green total factor energy efficiency (GTFEE).…”

Section: Environmental Federalism: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Political Economy of Environmental Consequences: A Review of the Empirical Literature

Chen

Chang

et al. 2020

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a key concern for human survival and development, environmental issues have been widely perceived to be impacted by various political institutional factors. A considerable body of literature has attempted to investigate how different political factors affect environmental policymaking and outcomes. In this paper, we critically review related scholarly works published in peer‐reviewed economic journals in the past 30 years, with an emphasis on the empirical literature. Political institutional factors considered in this survey include corruption, the general concept and specific elements of democracy, and the vertical structure of environmental regulation authority within different levels of governments (i.e. environmental federalism). Studies focusing on the interplay of these factors are also highlighted. Based on a critical review, we provide a guide to the datasets, methodologies, and main findings of the literature. We also point out the existing gaps, and put forward suggestions for future research directions.

show abstract

Section: Environmental Federalismmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Both Feng et al . (2020) and Zhang and Li (2020) provide evidence that environmental decentralization is able to promote green technology innovation. Feng et al .…”

Section: Environmental Federalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Environmental Federalism: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Political Economy of Environmental Consequences: A Review of the Empirical Literature

Chen

Chang

et al. 2020

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, environmental decentralization has been a major focus of scholars, the relationship between environmental decentralization and green innovation has also been explored. For example, Feng et al (2020)…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Environmental Decentralization Improve Regional Green Innovation? Evidence from China

Yang¹,

Liu²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Green innovation is critical for sustainable development. The reform of environmental management system plays an important role in improving environmental pollution and technology progress. Working from a heterogeneous perspective, this study investigates the effects of different types of environmental decentralization on regional green innovation using statistical data from 30 provinces in China over the period of 2000–2015. The results show that environmental decentralization (ED) promotes regional green innovation. Furthermore, according to different environmental management of levels and affairs, we divide environmental decentralization into provincial-level environmental decentralization (PED), municipal-level environmental decentralization (MED), and county-level environmental decentralization (CED); environmental administrative decentralization (EAD), environmental monitoring decentralization (EMD), and environmental supervision decentralization (ESD), respectively. There is also evidence suggesting that different types of environmental decentralization have varied effects on regional green innovation. These findings set out in this study are robust when different methods are employed. A further investigation indicates that the effects of different types of environmental decentralization on green innovation apparently differ across Chinese different regions. Some policy recommendations will help policymakers to determine more effective environmental decentralization.

show abstract

“…The Republic of Indonesia as a Unitary State adheres to the principle of decentralization in the administration of government in the regions (Rakib & Syam, 2016;Riskasari, 2016;Zulkifli, Suasa, Mukarramah, Daswati, & Samad, 2018), by providing opportunities and flexibility for regions to carry out regional autonomy (Cheng, Awan, Ahmad, & Tan, 2021;Su, Umar, & Khan, 2021;Wu, Hao, & Ren, 2020). In the context of implementing regional autonomy, it will greatly depend on the readiness of the Regional Government in managing its government system (Feng, Sui, Liu, & Li, 2020;G. Li, Guo, & Di, 2021;Ran, Zhang, & Hao, 2020) to create a development that is effective, efficient, transparent, and accountable as well as to get participation from the community in running its government.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Participation in Development at Soppeng Regency

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community participation is the main asset in achieving the government's program goals. This study aims to determine community participation in development at Baringeng Village, Soppeng regency. Therefore, to find out the objectives of this study, the researcher used descriptive qualitative research. The informants in this study were (7 peoples) using data collection techniques that were carried out through observation, interviews, and documentation. The data obtained from the research results were processed using data analysis techniques consisting of data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. The results showed that community participation in development at Baringeng village, Soppeng regency was in the high category. This can be viewed from several indicators, including thought participation, energy participation, property participation, skills participation, and social participation.

show abstract

Environmental decentralization and innovation in China

Cited by 56 publications

References 49 publications

The Political Economy of Environmental Consequences: A Review of the Empirical Literature

The Political Economy of Environmental Consequences: A Review of the Empirical Literature

Does Environmental Decentralization Improve Regional Green Innovation? Evidence from China

Community Participation in Development at Soppeng Regency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About