Environmental Performance Analysis of Eco‐Industrial Parks in China: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach

Abstract

Summary In pursuit of more sustainable development of industry, China has been actively developing eco‐industrial parks (EIPs) for more than a decade. However, the environmental value of these EIPs remains largely unverified. This study aimed to evaluate the environmental performance of national EIPs in China using data envelopment analysis. Eco‐efficiency and environmental performance indices were used to represent the static and dynamic environmental performance of EIPs, respectively. An environmental performance index was formed by combining measures of eco‐efficiency in a dynamic setting with the sequential Malmquist index approach. We obtained three main empirical findings. First, 34 national EIPs exhibited a cumulative environmental performance improvement of 89.4% from 2007 to 2010, which is primarily the result of eco‐efficiency change rather than environmental technical change. Second, compared with the trial EIPs, the demonstration EIPs had a higher average eco‐efficiency (0.611 vs. 0.446 in 2010) and experienced greater average environmental performance improvement (129% vs. 60%). Third, the EIPs retrofitted from high‐tech industrial development zones exhibited much higher average eco‐efficiency (0.798 vs. 0.440 in 2010) than those retrofitted from economic and technical development zones. The key measures supporting the performance improvement and policy implications for the development of EIPs are also discussed.

Exploring Greenhouse Gas‐Mitigation Strategies in Chinese Eco‐Industrial Parks by Targeting Energy Infrastructure Stocks

“…; Liu et al. ). In this study, we collected data on 106 EIPs, accounting for 98% of the existing EIPs.…”

Tools for promoting industrial symbiosis: A systematic review

“…A total of 18 studies in our sample have referenced LCA for evaluating the performance in the context of IS (Dong, Geng, Xi, & Fujita, ; Felicio, Amaral, Esposto, & Gabarrell Durany, ; Geng et al., ; Genovese, Acquaye, Figueroa, & Koh, ; Jung et al. ; Korhonen & Snäkin, ; Liu et al., ; Liu, Tian, Chen, Lu, & Gao, ; Mantese and Amaral, ; Martin, ; Martin, Svensson, & Eklund, ; Mattila, Lehtoranta, Sokka, Melanen, & Nissinen, ; Mattila, Pakarinen, & Sokka, ; Rosa & Beloborodko, ; Tong, Liu, Liu, Yuan, & Zhang, ; Valenzuela‐Venegas, Salgado, & Díaz‐Alvarado, ; Valero et al., ).…”

Temporal Comparative Analysis of Industrial Symbiosis in a Business Network: Opportunities of Circular Economy

“…In addition, they mention that CE allows for improvements in economic performance as it allows for reduced energy consumption and the reuse of waste materials, based on the "3R" principle -reduce, reuse and recycle [47]. However, this principle should be improved in waste management in industrial parks, which have difficulty in reusing and recycling materials [48,49]. Thus, CE currently represents a viable option for countries, governments, universities and society to transform linear and semicircular materials, as well as energy flows into circular flows, allowing sustainable benefits and competitive advantages.…”