IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i18p11566-d916010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Distribution of Development Types of Forestry-Ecological-Culture Industries in Chinese Provinces

Author

Listed:
  • Luyu Huang

    (School of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
    School of Marxism, Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China)

  • Guochun Wu

    (School of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China)

  • Yukun Cao

    (School of Economics and Management, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China)

Abstract

It is vital to promote the sustainable economic and social development and ecological culture prosperity of forest areas in various regions to scientifically and objectively understand the development status of forestry-ecological-culture industries in all provinces (districts and cities) of China. It is also important to clarify the advantages of industrial development in various regions. Based on the comprehensive consideration of economic, social, and political factors, the evaluation index system of forestry-ecological-culture industry, which includes industrial productivity, industrial influence, industrial and driving force, is constructed in this study. Furthermore, the development of forestry-ecological-culture industry in 31 provinces and regions of China from 2014 to 2019 is analyzed by cluster analysis. The analysis categorized the industries into four development types: very high level developed, high level developed, medium level developed, and low level developed according to the principal component score, which sums up the characteristics of various types of industrial development. The results show that the forestry-ecological-culture industry in China presents the spatial distribution of “east high and west low”, which is related to the difference in regional economic development level. Furthermore, the advantage of resource endowment is not clear, the gap between provinces and regions is large, and the overall development level of industry is relatively low. The findings of this study provide theory-based guidance and policy suggestions for improving the efficiency of industrial development and optimizing spatial distribution of diversified industrial development.

Suggested Citation

  • Luyu Huang & Guochun Wu & Yukun Cao, 2022. "Spatial Distribution of Development Types of Forestry-Ecological-Culture Industries in Chinese Provinces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11566-:d:916010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11566/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11566/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timo Kuosmanen & Mika Kortelainen, 2005. "Measuring Eco‐efficiency of Production with Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 59-72, October.
    2. Peltoniemi, Mirva, 2013. "Mechanisms of capability evolution in the Finnish forest industry cluster," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 190-205.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    2. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    3. Meike Weltin & Silke Hüttel, 2023. "Sustainable Intensification Farming as an Enabler for Farm Eco-Efficiency?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 315-342, January.
    4. Cha, Kyounghoon & Lim, Songtak & Hur, Tak, 2008. "Eco-efficiency approach for global warming in the context of Kyoto Mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 274-280, September.
    5. Tianqun Xu & Ping Gao & Qian Yu & Debin Fang, 2017. "An Improved Eco-Efficiency Analysis Framework Based on Slacks-Based Measure Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Marileena Koskela & Jarmo Vehmas, 2012. "Defining Eco‐efficiency: A Case Study on the Finnish Forest Industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 546-566, December.
    7. Eder, Andreas, 2021. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Discussion Papers DP-75-2021, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    8. Haiyang Shang & Fang Su & Serhat Yüksel & Hasan Dinçer, 2021. "Identifying the Strategic Priorities of the Technical Factors for the Sustainable Low Carbon Industry Based on Macroeconomic Conditions," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, May.
    9. Silva, Elvira & Magalhães, Manuela, 2023. "Environmental efficiency, irreversibility and the shadow price of emissions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 955-967.
    10. Magambo, Isaiah & Dikgang, Johane & Gelo, Dambala & Tregenna, Fiona, 2021. "Environmental and Technical Efficiency in Large Gold Mines in Developing Countries," MPRA Paper 108068, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Trinks, Arjan & Mulder, Machiel & Scholtens, Bert, 2020. "An Efficiency Perspective on Carbon Emissions and Financial Performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    12. Figueiredo, Paulo N., 2016. "Evolution of the short-fiber technological trajectory in Brazil's pulp and paper industry: The role of firm-level innovative capability-building and indigenous institutions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-14.
    13. Alfredsson, Eva & Månsson, Jonas & Vikström, Peter, 2016. "Internalising external environmental effects in efficiency analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 22-31.
    14. Zuoren Sun & Chao An & Huachen Sun, 2018. "Regional Differences in Energy and Environmental Performance: An Empirical Study of 283 Cities in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-28, July.
    15. Kuosmanen, Timo & Kortelainen, Mika, 2007. "Valuing environmental factors in cost-benefit analysis using data envelopment analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 56-65, April.
    16. Kounetas, Konstantinos & Polemis, Michael & Tzeremes, Nickolaos, 2019. "An alternative probabilistic frontier analysis to the measurement of eco-efficiency," MPRA Paper 93686, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Song, Malin & Zhang, Jie & Wang, Shuhong, 2015. "Review of the network environmental efficiencies of listed petroleum enterprises in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 65-71.
    18. H. K. Millington & J. E. Lovell & C. A. K. Lovell, 2013. "Using Fieldwork, GIS and DEA to Guide Management of Urban Stream Health," CEPA Working Papers Series WP072013, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    19. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    20. George Halkos & Nickolaos Tzeremes & Panayiotis Tzeremes, 2015. "A nonparametric approach for evaluating long-term energy policy scenarios: an application to the Greek energy system," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 4(1), pages 1-14, December.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:18:p:11566-:d:916010. 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.