Spatial-temporal evolution and formation mechanism of ecological well-being performance in Jiangsu Province

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2023.03.2020926

Abstract

Abstract:

Ecological well-being performance integrates the three major systems of economy, society and ecology. It is an effective tool for measuring the sustainable development capacity and reflects both regional inter-generational equity and intra-generational equity. This study uses the Super SBM-DEA model and system dynamic panel regression model to analyze the spatial-temporal evolution characteristics, influencing factors and formation mechanism of ecological well-being performance in Jiangsu province from 2000 to 2017. The study found that: (1) The level of urban ecological well-being performance in Jiangsu province was relatively low, and the overall shape was a "U" characteristic that first declines and then rises. It has experienced rapid decline, slow fluctuations and orderly growth. (2) From a spatial perspective, the difference in ecological well-being performance between regional cities was significant, and there was a significant spatial mismatch between economic growth and ecological well-being performance. The economic well-being performance of the economically developed cities in south Jiangsu was far lower than that of the underdeveloped central and northern Jiangsu cities. (3) The system dynamic panel regression showed that urbanization, economic growth and ecological well-being performance all show a significant U-shaped curve relationship, consumption level and industrial structure advanced played a significant positive driving role, foreign direct investment and energy intensity played a significant inhibitory role, the impact of population density on ecological well-being performance was weak and insignificant.

Key words: ecological well-being performance, spatial-temporal evolution, influencing factors, Jiangsu Province

摘要：

生态福利绩效融合经济、社会、生态三大系统，是衡量城市可持续发展能力的有效工具，反映了区域代际公平和代内公平。对2000—2017年江苏省13座城市生态福利绩效的时空演化特征、影响因素及形成机制研究发现：（1）江苏省城市生态福利绩效年均值较低，为0.455，整体呈现先下降后上升的“U形”变动特征，先后经历快速下降期、缓慢波动期及有序增长期；（2）从空间上看，城市之间生态福利绩效差异显著，经济发展水平与生态福利绩效具有明显的空间错配，经济发达的苏南地市生态福利绩效远低于经济欠发达的苏中、苏北地市；（3）动态面板回归揭示城镇化、经济增长与生态福利绩效均呈现显著的“U形”曲线关系，消费水平和产业结构高级化起到显著的正向驱动作用，外商直接投资和能源强度起到显著的抑制作用，人口密度对生态福利绩效的影响程度较弱且不显著。

关键词: 生态福利绩效, 时空演化, 影响因素, 江苏省

Zaijun LI, Meijuan HU. Spatial-temporal evolution and formation mechanism of ecological well-being performance in Jiangsu Province[J]. World Regional Studies, 2023, 32(3): 124-135.

李在军, 胡美娟. 江苏省生态福利绩效时空演化及影响机制研究[J]. 世界地理研究, 2023, 32(3): 124-135.

Figures/Tables 7

References 29

1	方时姣, 肖权. 中国区域生态福利绩效水平及其空间效应研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019, 29(3): 1-10.
	FANG S. XIAO Q. Research on regional ecological well-being performance and spatial effect in China. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019, 29(3): 1-10.
2	DALY H. Sustainable development: From concept and theory to operational principles. Population and Development Review, 1990, 16: 25-43.
3	COMMON M. Measuring national economic performance without using prices. Ecological Economics, 2007, 64(1): 92-102.
4	MICHALOS A. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Heidelberg: Springer, 2014.
5	KNIGHT K, ROSA E. The environmental efficiency of well-being: A cross-national analysis. Social Science Research, 2011, 40(3): 931-949.
6	诸大建, 张帅. 生态福利绩效与深化可持续发展的研究. 同济大学学报(社会科学版), 2014, 25(5): 106-115.
	ZHU D, ZHANG S. Ecological wellbeing performance and further research on sustainable development. Journal of Tongji University (Social Science Section), 2014, 25(5): 106-115.
7	冯吉芳, 袁健红. 中国区域生态福利绩效及其影响因素. 中国科技论坛, 2016, 32(3): 100-105.
	FENG J, YUAN J. On Chinese regional ecological well-being performance and its influence factors. Forum on Science and Technology in China, 2016, 32(3): 100-105.
8	FENG Y, ZHONG S, LI Q, et al. Ecological well-being performance growth in China (1994-2014): From perspectives of industrial structure green adjustment and green total factor productivity.Journal of Cleaner Production,2019,236: 117556.
9	刘娜, 程钰, 韩政.中国生态福利绩效时空演变与影响因素. 济南大学学报(自然科学版), 2021,35(5): 1-11.
	LIU N, CHENG Y, HAN Z. Spatio-temporal evolution and influencing factors of ecological well-being performance in China. Journal of University of Jinan(Science and Technology), 2021(5): 1-11.
10	金凤君. 论人类可持续发展的空间福利. 地理研究, 2014, 33(3): 582-588.
	JIN F. Sustainable spatial welfare: The cornerstone for human beings' development. Geographic Research, 2014, 33(3): 582-588.
11	诸大建, 张帅. 生态福利绩效及其与经济增长的关系研究. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2014, 24(9): 59-67.
	ZHU D, ZHANG S. Research on ecological wellbeing performance and its relationship with economic growth. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2014, 24(9): 59-67.
12	臧漫丹, 诸大建, 刘国平. 生态福利绩效: 概念、内涵及G20实证. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2013, 23(5): 118-124.
	ZANG M, ZHU D, LIU G. Ecological well-being performance: Concept, connotation and empirical of G20. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2013, 23(5): 118-124.
13	杜慧彬, 黄立军, 张辰, 等. 中国省级生态福利绩效区域差异性分解和收敛性研究. 生态经济, 2019, 35(3): 187-193.
	DU H, HUANG L, ZHANG C, et al. Research on the regional differences decomposition and convergence mechanism of ecological well-being performance. Ecological Economy, 2019, 35(3): 187-193.
14	龙亮军,王霞,郭兵. 基于改进DEA模型的城市生态福利绩效评价研究——以我国35个大中城市为例. 自然资源学报, 2017, 32(4): 595-605.
	LONG L, WANG X, GUO B. Evaluation of urban ecological well-being performance based on Revised DEA Model--A case study of 35 major cities in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2017, 32(4): 595-605.
15	诸大建, 张帅. 基于生态足迹的中国福利水平及其影响因素研究. 城市与环境研究, 2014, 1(1): 18-33.
	ZHU D, ZHANG S. The research on wellbeing level of China and its impact factors from the perspective of ecological footprint. Urban and Environmental Studies, 2014, 1(1): 18-33.
16	刘国平.中国能源福利绩效及其因素分解研究: 基于G20数据.经济问题探索,2017,38(1):24-30.
	LIU G.Energy welfare performance and factor decomposition in China: Based on G20 data.Inquiry into Economic Issues,2017,38(1): 24-30.
17	ENGELBRECHT H. Nature capital, subjective well-being, and the new welfare economic of sustainability: Some evidence from cross-country regressions. Ecological Economics, 2009, 69(2): 380-388.
18	LONG R, ZHANG Q, CHEN H, et al. Measurement of the energy intensity of human well-being and spatial econometric analysis of its influencing factors. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2020, 17(1): 357.
19	龙亮军. 综合福利视角下中国生态文明建设绩效评价及国际比较. 自然资源学报, 2019, 34(6): 1259-1272.
	LONG L. Evaluation of ecological civilization construction performance and its international comparison from the perspective of overall well-being. Journal of Natural Resources, 2019, 34(6): 1259-1272.
20	HU M, SARWAR S, LI Z. Spatio-temporal differentiation mode and threshold effect of Yangtze River Delta urban ecological well-being performance based on network DEA. Sustainability, 2021, 13(8): 4550.
21	TONE K. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 2001, 130(3): 498-509.
22	TONE K. A slacks-based measure of super-efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 2002, 143(1): 32-41.
23	李成宇, 张士强, 张伟, 等. 中国省际生态福利绩效测算及影响因素研究. 地理科学, 2019, 39(12): 1875-1883.
	LI C, ZHANG S, ZHANG W, et al. Measurement and influencing factors of inter-provincial ecological well-being performance in China. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2019, 39(12): 1875-1883.
24	徐维祥, 徐志雄, 刘程军. 黄河流域地级城市土地集约利用效率与生态福利绩效的耦合性分析. 自然资源学报, 2021, 36(1): 114-130.
	XU W, XU Z, LIU C. Coupling analysis of land intensive use efficiency and ecological well-being performance of cities in the Yellow River Basin. Journal of Natural Resources, 2021, 36(1): 114-130.
25	BALESTRA C, BOARINI R, TOSETTO E. What matters most to people? Evidence from the OECD better life index users' responses. Social Indicators Research, 2018, 136(3): 907-930.
26	张云飞. 城市群内产业集聚与经济增长关系的实证研究——基于面板数据的分析. 经济地理, 2014, 34(1): 108-113.
	ZHANG Y. Empirical studies on the relationship between industrial agglomeration and economic growth within the urban agglomeration--Based on panel data analysis. Economic Geography, 2014, 34(1): 108-113.
27	刘耀彬, 袁华锡, 王喆. 文化产业集聚对绿色经济效率的影响——基于动态面板模型的实证分析. 资源科学, 2017, 39(4): 747-755.
	LIU Y, YUAN H, WANG Z. Dynamic panel data modeling of the effects of cultural industry clusters on green economic efficiency. Resources Science, 2017, 39(4): 747-755.
28	WANG R, FENG Y. Research on China's ecological welfare performance evaluation and improvement path from the perspective of high-quality development. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020: 1-14.
29	BIAN J, REN H, LIU P. Evaluation of urban ecological well-being performance in China: A case study of 30 provincial capital cities. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 254(1): 120109.

一级指标	二级指标	三级指标
投入	土地资源消耗	人均建成区面积（X1）
	水资源消耗	人均用水量（X2）
	能源资源消耗	人均能源消费量（X3）
非期望产出	废水排放量	人均工业废水排放量（Y1）、人均生活污水排放量（Y2）
	工业废气排放量	人均工业废气排放量（Y3）
	固体废弃物产生量	人均固体废弃物产生量（Y4）
期望产出	经济水平	人均可支配收入（Z1）
	教育水平	人均受教育年限（Z2）
	医疗服务水平	万人医生数（Z3）、万人医院数（Z4）、万人床位数（Z5）

一级指标	二级指标	三级指标
投入	土地资源消耗	人均建成区面积（X1）
	水资源消耗	人均用水量（X2）
	能源资源消耗	人均能源消费量（X3）
非期望产出	废水排放量	人均工业废水排放量（Y1）、人均生活污水排放量（Y2）
	工业废气排放量	人均工业废气排放量（Y3）
	固体废弃物产生量	人均固体废弃物产生量（Y4）
期望产出	经济水平	人均可支配收入（Z1）
	教育水平	人均受教育年限（Z2）
	医疗服务水平	万人医生数（Z3）、万人医院数（Z4）、万人床位数（Z5）

自变量	符号	计算方法	单位
城市化	URB	城镇人口/常住人口	%
经济增长	PGDP	地区生产总值/常住人口	万元/人
消费水平	CON	社会消费品零售额/常住人口	元/人
产业结构	STR	第三产业增加值/第二产业增加值	%
外商投资	FDI	外商直接投资额/社会固定投资总额	%
能源强度	ENR	能源消费量/GDP	吨标准煤/万元
人口密度	PD	常住人口/城市面积	人/km²

自变量	符号	计算方法	单位
城市化	URB	城镇人口/常住人口	%
经济增长	PGDP	地区生产总值/常住人口	万元/人
消费水平	CON	社会消费品零售额/常住人口	元/人
产业结构	STR	第三产业增加值/第二产业增加值	%
外商投资	FDI	外商直接投资额/社会固定投资总额	%
能源强度	ENR	能源消费量/GDP	吨标准煤/万元
人口密度	PD	常住人口/城市面积	人/km²

自变量	基准回归	固定效应	动态面板回归
自变量	模型1	模型2	模型3	模型4	模型5	模型6	模型7	模型8	模型9
EWP_2	0.320^*** (12.28)	0.249^*** (5.85)	0.576^*** (23.34)	0.400^*** (35.72)	0.510^*** (20.21)	0.456^*** (22.13)	0.488^*** (22.31)	0.421^*** (13.69)	0.455^*** (31.37)
lnURB	0.213 (1.04)	0.234 (1.39)	-0.102^*** (-2.96)	-0.232^*** (-3.58)	-0.239^*** (-4.49)	0.078 (1.21)	0.108 (0.79)	0.113 (0.76)	0.192^* (1.85)
lnURB²	0.318^** (2.69)	0.056 (0.31)	0.563 (0.46)	0.143^* (1.72)	0.221^*** (3.54)	0.219^*** (4.42)	0.216^*** (4.42)	0.216^*** (3.98)	0.321^*** (5.24)
lnPGDP	-0.130^* (-1.79)	-0.539^*** (-3.21)		0.141^*** (5.23)	-0.245^*** (-6.79)	-0.232^*** (-7.32)	-0.142^*** (-3.87)	-0.145^*** (-4.42)	-0.156^*** (-4.74)
lnCON	0.321^*** (5.12)	0.531^*** (4.56)			0.631^*** (20.45)	0.553^*** (18.74)	0.442^*** (18.34)	0.432^*** (17.25)	0.419^*** (16.13)
lnSTR	0.321^*** (5.23)	0.212^*** (3.19)				0.212^*** (5.42)	0.325^*** (5.23)	0.289^*** (4.04)	0.301^*** (5.10)
lnFDI	-0.234^** (-2.56)	-0.032 (-0.56)					-0.432^*** (-3.43)	-0.034^*** (-3.21)	-0.119^*** (-4.13)
lnENR	-0.031 (-0.89)	0.021 (0.12)						-0.168^*** (-4.73)	-0.124^*** (-4.43)
lnPD	0.132^** (2.31)	-0.120 (-0.11)							0.063^** (2.59)
_cons	-0.134^** (-2.35)	0.126 (0.44)	0.152^*** (5.32)	0.432^*** (10.11)	0.126^*** (4.55)	-0.232^*** (-4.63)	-0.128^*** (-3.43)	-0.032 (-1.43)	-0.279^*** (-3.56)
AR（1）	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
AR（2）	0.123	0.119	0.111	0.105	0.116	0.107	0.105	0.126	0.127
Sargan	0.121	0.140	0.122	0.135	0.113	0.145	0.138	0.115	0.129