4.7 Article

The effects of three types of environmental regulation on energy consumption-evidence from China

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 25, Issue 27, Pages 27334-27351

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-2769-5

Keywords

Environmental regulation; Energy consumption; Technological innovation; Endogeneity; Counterfactual simulation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71773011]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China [2015CDJSK]
  3. basic Research and Innovation Development Fund for Central Universities of China [2017CDJSK01PT04]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Based on panel data from 1997 to 2015 in China, in this paper, the direct and indirect effects of three types of environmental regulation on energy consumption are explored with the 2SLS and system GMM method. The main conclusions of this study are as follows: (1) the effects of three types of environmental regulation on energy consumption are quite varied. The cost effect of the economical environmental regulation is significant in the direct path. However, the phenomenon of Green Paradox emerges in legal and supervised types of environmental regulation. The rebound effect of energy, which led to a new energy demand, is greater than the energy conservation generated by technological innovation in the indirect path, which is embodied as a suppression effect. (2) The legal and supervised types of environmental regulation in the eastern, central, and western regions have a Green Paradox and rebound effect on energy consumption. By contrast, the economical environmental regulation shows an opposite performance. (3) The counterfactual simulation results indicate that the net effects of three types of environmental regulation on energy consumption are different. Based on the findings, some corresponding policy implications are provided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available