IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2018i1p45-d193137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Efficacy of Government Spending on Air Pollution Control: A Case Study from Beijing

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoyao Xie

    (School of Law, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China)

  • Yuhong Wang

    (School of Business, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China)

Abstract

The reform and opening up of the Chinese economy over the last 40 years has led to rapid economic development. However, with the rapid expansion of the economy, increasingly serious air pollution is apparent. In order to control urban air pollution effectively, Chinese governments at all levels have invested large sums every year. However, it has become a difficult issue which influences public government decisions with respect to how and according to what standard to distribute financial funds so as to improve air quality while saving money at the same time. Taking Beijing as an example, this paper investigates the ten-year change in the annual daily mean of inhalable particulate matter (PM 10 ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) from the year of 2006 to 2015, researches the invested funds in environmental protection in Beijing, and establishes a relationship between the atmospheric indexes of the above three parameters and government-invested funds in environmental protection. According to model analysis, government financial input has an obvious influence on the improvement of air quality. However, during the long period of financial input, the degree of air quality improvement will reduce gradually as time goes by. There exists a direct link between the effectiveness of government financial input to promote air quality and the air quality index, which means when the pollutant standards index is poor (i.e., the corresponding pollutant concentration is higher), the effectiveness will be more apparent. On the contrary, when the index is at a good level, the effectiveness of government financial input is very small. To achieve the best air quality conditions, the government should set the detailed financial input at or over the first-grade standard according to urban air quality standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoyao Xie & Yuhong Wang, 2018. "Evaluating the Efficacy of Government Spending on Air Pollution Control: A Case Study from Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2018:i:1:p:45-:d:193137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/1/45/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/1/45/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, G.M & Krueger, A.B., 1991. "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," Papers 158, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
    2. Zhang, Qi & Li, Zhan & Wang, Ge & Li, Hailong, 2016. "Study on the impacts of natural gas supply cost on gas flow and infrastructure deployment in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1385-1398.
    3. Zhang, Ni & Yan, Yu & Su, Wencong, 2015. "A game-theoretic economic operation of residential distribution system with high participation of distributed electricity prosumers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 471-479.
    4. Coady, David & Parry, Ian & Sears, Louis & Shang, Baoping, 2017. "How Large Are Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 11-27.
    5. Halkos, George E. & Paizanos, Epameinondas Α., 2013. "The effect of government expenditure on the environment:An empirical investigation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 48-56.
    6. Fullerton, Don & Kim, Seung-Rae, 2008. "Environmental investment and policy with distortionary taxes, and endogenous growth," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 141-154, September.
    7. Xinxing Xu & Yuhong Wang, 2017. "Study on Spatial Spillover Effects of Logistics Industry Development for Economic Growth in the Yangtze River Delta City Cluster Based on Spatial Durbin Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang & Atsagli, Philip, 2016. "Environmental and welfare assessment of fossil-fuels subsidies removal: A computable general equilibrium analysis for Ghana," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 1172-1179.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mihaela Onofrei & Anca-Florentina Gavriluţă (Vatamanu) & Ionel Bostan & Bogdan Florin Filip & Claudia Laurența Popescu & Gabriela Jitaru, 2020. "Impacts of the Allocation of Governmental Resources for Improving the Environment. An Empirical Analysis on Developing European Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Zolfagharinia, Hossein & Zangiabadi, Maryam & Hafezi, Maryam, 2023. "How much is enough? Government subsidies in supporting green product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(3), pages 1316-1333.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alotaish Mohammed Saud M. & Ping Guo & Ihtisham ul Haq & Guoqin Pan & Alam Khan, 2019. "Do government expenditure and financial development impede environmental degradation in Venezuela?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Ayoub Zeraibi & Daniel Balsalobre-Lorente & Khurram Shehzad, 2021. "Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypotheses in Chinese Provinces: A Nexus between Regional Government Expenditures and Environmental Quality," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Juhyun Oh, 2023. "The Effects of Local Government Expenditures on Carbon Dioxide Emissions: Evidence from Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Galinato, Gregmar I. & Islam, Asif, 2017. "The challenge of addressing consumption pollutants with fiscal policy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(5), pages 624-647, October.
    5. Dong, Xiao-Ying & Hao, Yu, 2018. "Would income inequality affect electricity consumption? Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 215-227.
    6. Huang, Bihong & Xu, Yining, 2019. "Environmental Performance in Asia: Overview, Drivers, and Policy Implications," ADBI Working Papers 990, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    7. Hao, Yu & Zhang, Zong-Yong & Liao, Hua & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2015. "China’s farewell to coal: A forecast of coal consumption through 2020," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 444-455.
    8. Liu, Yiming & Hao, Yu & Gao, Yixuan, 2017. "The environmental consequences of domestic and foreign investment: Evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 271-280.
    9. Xiang, Hongjin & Kuang, Yanxiang, 2020. "Who benefits from China’s coal subsidy policies? A computable partial equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Halkos, George E. & Paizanos, Epameinondas Α., 2016. "The effects of fiscal policy on CO2 emissions: Evidence from the U.S.A," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 317-328.
    11. Wang, Qunwei & Zhou, Bo & Zhang, Cheng & Zhou, Dequn, 2021. "Do energy subsidies reduce fiscal and household non-energy expenditures? A regional heterogeneity assessment on coal-to-gas program in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Halkos, George & Paizanos, Epameinondas, 2015. "Effects of Macroeconomic Policy on Air Quality: Evidence from the US," MPRA Paper 62001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Halkos, George & Paizanos, Epameinondas, 2015. "Environmental Macroeconomics: A critical literature review and future empirical research directions," MPRA Paper 67432, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chakraborty, Lekha & Kaur, Amandeep & Mohanty, Ranjan Kumar & Rangan, Divy, 2024. "COP28 and Environmental Federalism: Empirical Evidence from an Emerging Economy, India," Working Papers 24/406, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    15. Lin, Boqiang & Xu, Mengmeng, 2019. "Good subsidies or bad subsidies? Evidence from low-carbon transition in China's metallurgical industry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 52-60.
    16. Nor Salwati Othman & Hussain Ali Bekhet, 2021. "Dynamic Effects of Malaysia's Government Spending on Environment Quality: Bridging STIRPAT and EKC Hypothesis," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(5), pages 343-355.
    17. Aiman Albatayneh & Adel Juaidi & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro, 2023. "The Negative Impact of Electrical Energy Subsidies on the Energy Consumption—Case Study from Jordan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-17, January.
    18. Yu Hao & Yi-Ming Liu, 2015. "Has the development of FDI and foreign trade contributed to China’s CO 2 emissions? An empirical study with provincial panel data," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(2), pages 1079-1091, March.
    19. Hao, Yu & Zhang, Tianli & Jing, Leijie & Xiao, Linqi, 2019. "Would the decoupling of electricity occur along with economic growth? Empirical evidence from the panel data analysis for 100 Chinese cities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 615-625.
    20. Wanfang Xiong & Yan Han & M. James C. Crabbe & Xiao-Guang Yue, 2020. "Fiscal Expenditures on Science and Technology and Environmental Pollution: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-20, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2018:i:1:p:45-:d:193137. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.