IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i23p8761-d450974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fiscal Expenditures on Science and Technology and Environmental Pollution: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Wanfang Xiong

    (Department of Finance, School of Economics, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China)

  • Yan Han

    (School of Humanities and Social Science, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

  • M. James C. Crabbe

    (Wolfson College, Oxford University, Oxford OX2 6UD, UK
    School of Life Sciences, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, China
    Institute of Biomedical and Environmental Science & Technology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Bedfordshire, Park Square, Luton LU1 3JU, UK)

  • Xiao-Guang Yue

    (Department of Computer Science and Engineering, School of Sciences, European University Cyprus, Nicosia 1516, Cyprus
    CIICESI, ESTG, Politécnico do Porto, 4610-156 Felgueiras, Portugal
    Department of Business Sciences, University Giustino Fortunato, 82100 Benevento, Italy)

Abstract

Studying the driving factors of environmental pollution is of great importance for China. Previous literature mainly focused on the cause of national aggregate emission changes. However, research about the effect of fiscal expenditures on science and technology (FESTs) on environmental pollution is rare. Considering the large gap among cities in China, it is necessary to investigate whether and how FESTs affect environmental pollution among cities. We adopted three kinds of typical environmental pollutants including sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions, wastewater emission, and atmospheric particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM 2.5 ). Using the data of 260 prefecture-level cities over ten years in China, we found that FESTs play a significantly positive role in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions and PM 2.5 concentrations, but fail to alleviate wastewater emissions. Specifically, for every 1% increase in FESTs, SO 2 emissions were reduced by 5.317% and PM 2.5 concentrations were reduced by 5.329%. Furthermore, we found that FESTs reduced environmental pollution by impeding fixed asset investments and by promoting research and development activities (R&D). Moreover, the impacts of FESTs on environmental pollution varied across regions and sub-periods. Our results are robust to a series of additional checks, including alternative econometric specifications, generalized method of moments (GMM) analysis and overcoming potential endogeneity with an instrumental variable. Our findings confirm that government efforts can be effective on pollution control in China. Hence, all governments should pay more attention to FESTs for sustainable development and environmental quality improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:23:p:8761-:d:450974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/23/8761/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/23/8761/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arik Levinson, 2015. "A Direct Estimate of the Technique Effect: Changes in the Pollution Intensity of US Manufacturing, 1990-2008," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(1), pages 43-56.
    2. Angus Deaton, 2005. "Measuring Poverty in a Growing World (or Measuring Growth in a Poor World)," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Molly Lipscomb & Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak, 2017. "Decentralization and Pollution Spillovers: Evidence from the Re-drawing of County Borders in Brazil," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(1), pages 464-502.
    4. Lin, Boqiang & Zhu, Junpeng, 2019. "Fiscal spending and green economic growth: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 264-271.
    5. 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.
    6. Davoudi, Simin & Sturzaker, John, 2017. "Urban form, policy packaging and sustainable urban metabolism," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 55-64.
    7. Gene M. Grossman & Alan B. Krueger, 1995. "Economic Growth and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(2), pages 353-377.
    8. Robert J. Barro, 1991. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(2), pages 407-443.
    9. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    10. Susmita Dasgupta & Benoit Laplante & Hua Wang & David Wheeler, 2002. "Confronting the Environmental Kuznets Curve," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 147-168, Winter.
    11. Avraham Ebenstein & Maoyong Fan & Michael Greenstone & Guojun He & Peng Yin & Maigeng Zhou, 2015. "Growth, Pollution, and Life Expectancy: China from 1991-2012," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 226-231, May.
    12. Lee G. Branstetter & Mariko Sakakibara, 2002. "When Do Research Consortia Work Well and Why? Evidence from Japanese Panel Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 143-159, March.
    13. Afonso, António & Furceri, Davide, 2010. "Government size, composition, volatility and economic growth," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 517-532, December.
    14. López, Ramón & Galinato, Gregmar I. & Islam, Asif, 2011. "Fiscal spending and the environment: Theory and empirics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 180-198, September.
    15. Cheng, Shulei & Fan, Wei & Chen, Jiandong & Meng, Fanxin & Liu, Gengyuan & Song, Malin & Yang, Zhifeng, 2020. "The impact of fiscal decentralization on CO2 emissions in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    16. Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2010. "CO2 emissions, electricity consumption and output in ASEAN," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(6), pages 1858-1864, June.
    17. Le, Thai-Ha & Chang, Youngho & Park, Donghyun, 2016. "Trade openness and environmental quality: International evidence," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 45-55.
    18. Nadiri, M Ishaq & Mamuneas, Theofanis P, 1994. "The Effects of Public Infrastructure and R&D Capital on the Cost Structure and Performance of U.S. Manufacturing Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(1), pages 22-37, February.
    19. Hua, Yue & Xie, Rui & Su, Yaqin, 2018. "Fiscal spending and air pollution in Chinese cities: Identifying composition and technique effects," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 156-169.
    20. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Hussinger, Katrin, 2004. "The Link Between R&D Subsidies, R&D Spending and Technological Performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-56, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    21. Yuxiang, Karl & Chen, Zhongchang, 2010. "Government expenditure and energy intensity in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 691-694, February.
    22. Angus Deaton, 2005. "ERRATUM: Measuring Poverty in a Growing World (or Measuring Growth in a Poor World)," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(2), pages 395-395, May.
    23. Hilary Sigman, 2014. "Decentralization and Environmental Quality: An International Analysis of Water Pollution Levels and Variation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(1), pages 114-130.
    24. Cole, Matthew A., 2007. "Corruption, income and the environment: An empirical analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 637-647, May.
    25. Qiang Li & Jing-Jing Guo & Wei Liu & Xiao-Guang Yue & Nelson Duarte & Carla Pereira, 2020. "How Knowledge Acquisition Diversity Affects Innovation Performance during the Technological Catch-Up in Emerging Economies: A Moderated Inverse U-Shape Relationship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    26. Lin, Boqiang & Zhu, Junpeng, 2019. "Impact of energy saving and emission reduction policy on urban sustainable development: Empirical evidence from China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 12-22.
    27. Hao, Yu & Chen, Yu-Fu & Liao, Hua & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2020. "China's fiscal decentralization and environmental quality: theory and an empirical study," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 159-181, April.
    28. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    29. 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.
    30. Lin, Faqin, 2017. "Trade openness and air pollution: City-level empirical evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 78-88.
    31. MARA FACCIO & RONALD W. MASULIS & JOHN J. McCONNELL, 2006. "Political Connections and Corporate Bailouts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(6), pages 2597-2635, December.
    32. He, Qichun, 2015. "Fiscal decentralization and environmental pollution: Evidence from Chinese panel data," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 86-100.
    33. Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2001. "Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 877-908, September.
    34. Lopez, Ramon E. & Palacios, Amparo, 2010. "Have Government Spending and Energy Tax Policies Contributed to make Europe Environmentally Cleaner?," Working Papers 94795, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    35. Thomas Bernauer & Vally Koubi, 2013. "Are bigger governments better providers of public goods? Evidence from air pollution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 593-609, September.
    36. Song, Malin & Wang, Shuhong & Sun, Jing, 2018. "Environmental regulations, staff quality, green technology, R&D efficiency, and profit in manufacturing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-14.
    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. Rui Ding & Tao Zhou & Jian Yin & Yilin Zhang & Siwei Shen & Jun Fu & Linyu Du & Yiming Du & Shihui Chen, 2022. "Does the Urban Agglomeration Policy Reduce Energy Intensity? Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.

    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. Adewuyi, Adeolu O., 2016. "Effects of public and private expenditures on environmental pollution: A dynamic heterogeneous panel data analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 489-506.
    2. Chan, Ying Tung, 2020. "Are macroeconomic policies better in curbing air pollution than environmental policies? A DSGE approach with carbon-dependent fiscal and monetary policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    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. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Haouas, Ilham & Hoang, Thi Hong Van, 2019. "Economic growth and environmental degradation in Vietnam: Is the environmental Kuznets curve a complete picture?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 197-218.
    5. Chang, Chun-Ping & Dong, Minyi & Liu, Jiliang, 2019. "Environmental Governance and Environmental Performance," ADBI Working Papers 936, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    6. 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.
    7. Halkos, George & Paizanos, Epameinondas, 2015. "Environmental Macroeconomics: A critical literature review and future empirical research directions," MPRA Paper 67432, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Chun-Ping Chang & Minyi Dong & Jiliang Liu, 2019. "Environmental Governance and Environmental Performance," Working Papers id:13023, eSocialSciences.
    9. 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.
    10. Yulan Lv & Yumeng Pang & Buhari Doğan, 2022. "The role of Chinese fiscal decentralization in the governance of carbon emissions: perspectives from spatial effects decomposition and its heterogeneity," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 68(3), pages 635-668, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Ezcurra, Roberto, 2007. "Is there cross-country convergence in carbon dioxide emissions?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1363-1372, February.
    13. Myriam BEN SAAD, 2017. "L’effet de la complexité économique sur la pollution de l’air : une autre approche de la courbe environnementale de Kuznets," Region et Developpement, Region et Developpement, LEAD, Universite du Sud - Toulon Var, vol. 46, pages 21-41.
    14. Halkos, George E. & Tzeremes, Nickolaos G., 2013. "Carbon dioxide emissions and governance: A nonparametric analysis for the G-20," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 110-118.
    15. 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.
    16. Halkos, George, 2012. "The impact of government expenditure on the environment: An empirical investigation," MPRA Paper 39957, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. López, Ramón & Palacios, Amparo, 2011. "Why Europe has become environmentally cleaner: Decomposing the roles of fiscal, trade and environmental policies," CEPR Discussion Papers 8551, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Halkos, George & Paizanos, Epameinondas, 2014. "Exploring the effect of economic growth and government expenditure on the environment," MPRA Paper 56084, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Hao, Yu & Zhang, Zong-Yong & Yang, Chuxiao & Wu, Haitao, 2021. "Does structural labor change affect CO2 emissions? Theoretical and empirical evidence from China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    20. Ramón López & Amparo Palacios, 2014. "Why has Europe Become Environmentally Cleaner? Decomposing the Roles of Fiscal, Trade and Environmental Policies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 91-108, May.

    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:17:y:2020:i:23:p:8761-:d:450974. 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.