The comprehensive environmental efficiency of socioeconomic sectors in China: An analysis based on a non-separable bad output SBM

Abstract

The increasingly high frequency of heavy air pollution in most regions of China signals the urgent need for the transition to an environmentally friendly production performance by socioeconomic sectors for the sake of people's health and sustainable development. Focusing on CO2 and major air pollutants, this paper presents a comprehensive environmental efficiency index based on evaluating the environmental efficiency of major socioeconomic sectors, including agriculture, power, industry, residential and transportation, at the province level in China in 2010 based on a slack-based measure DEA model with non-separable bad output and weights determined by the coefficient of variation method. In terms of the environment, 5, 16, 6, 7 and 4 provinces operated along the production frontier for the agricultural, power, industrial, residential and transportation sectors, respectively, in China in 2010, whereas Shanxi, Heilongjiang, Ningxia, Hubei and Yunnan showed lowest efficiency correspondingly. The comprehensive environmental efficiency index varied from 0.3863 to 0.9261 for 30 provinces in China, with a nationwide average of 0.6383 in 2010; Shanghai ranked at the top, and Shanxi was last. Regional disparities in environmental efficiency were identified. A more detailed inefficiency decomposition and benchmarking analysis provided insight for understanding the source of comprehensive environmental inefficiency and, more specifically, the reduction potential for CO2 and air pollutants. Some specific research and policy implications were uncovered from this work

Sustainable Performance of Low-Carbon Energy Infrastructure Investment on Regional Development: Evidence from China

“…It is important for the government to have a clear idea about the impact of policy on sustainability in order to fine-tune and improve the efficiency of the implemented schemes. There have been a number of studies analyzing energy, economic, and environmental efficiency in the unity analytical framework using the DEA model, considering multiple inputs and outputs at national level [25][26][27]. In managerial practice, more insights into sustainable performance can be found in the Network DEA model, which is known for its abundance of information [28].…”

“…Wu et al [27] proposed a DEA model to estimated energy usage efficiency, CO 2 emission efficiency, and economic-environmental efficiency for Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) economies, in which a group of specific variables, including population, total primary energy consumption, GDP, and CO 2 emission, were used. Our sustainable performance evaluation was motivated by the multi-stage DEA framework with the input-output specification for performance score calculated separately as proposed by Wu et al [26], with a modification to the serial connection of the two-stage Network DEA model: the consumption of various energy types has been treated as intermediate variables from the previous stage to the following stage. Because infrastructure investment in the energy industry signals the effort to strengthen energy supply and/or grid systems in response to the increase in energy demand in a regional economic system, it was also included as one of the inputs to evaluate energy use efficiency.…”

Efficiency Evaluation of Atmospheric Pollutants Emission in Zhejiang Province China: A DEA-Malmquist Based Approach

“…It is intended to increase expected output while reducing unintended output and resource input [9]. For example, in some empirical studies, CO 2 emissions are often taken as output objects of pollutants [14][15][16], while SO 2 , NOx, and smoke & dust are included in undesired output indicators gradually [13,[17][18][19]. On the contrary, many scholars hold the view that air pollutant emissions are used as input indicators and GDP as an indicator of economic output.…”

Evaluating the Efficiency of Transit-Oriented Development Using Network Slacks-Based Data Envelopment Analysis

“…Various kinds of data, i.e., smartcard data, socio-economic data, and geographical data, were combined to evaluate the efficiency of TOD [33]. Transit efficiency was defined through the relationship between multiple inputs and outputs [34]. Transit efficiency refers to how well the transit system was introduced and managed with respect to the socio-economics, transit infrastructures, and transit trips of each station area [8].…”