IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v144y2025ics0140988325001719.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does service trade openness promote the green transformation of manufacturing firms? Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Shu, Zhongqiao
  • Peng, Shuijun
  • Huang, Xin

Abstract

Service intermediate inputs are generally more environmentally friendly and knowledge-intensive compared with goods. As China has continued to promote high-quality development and expand high-standard opening up, this paper aims to investigate how service trade openness of China provides a green upgrading path for manufacturing firms. We first construct a micro theoretical model and deduce three influence channels through which service trade openness can reduce pollution intensity of manufacturing firms: technological progress, cost reduction and efficiency improvement of resource allocation. Then, we estimate the trade costs in service sectors based on the service trade data in OECD database and the structural gravity model, and empirically verify the emission reduction effect of service trade openness with our estimation and China's firm-level data from 1999 to 2007. The results show that service trade openness can effectively reduce the pollution emission intensity of Chinese manufacturing firms through these three channels. And it is noteworthy that the technological progress is mainly due to the improvement of innovation quality, rather than the innovation quantity. In addition, this paper also finds that: (1) Emission reduction effect brought by trade openness in producer services is more significant, while trade openness in non-producer services actually increases firms' pollution intensity due to the crowding-out effect; (2) Emission reduction effect of service trade openness on non-SOEs and non-exporting firms are more manifest. This paper provides feasible paths for China and other developing economies to the achievement of green transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Shu, Zhongqiao & Peng, Shuijun & Huang, Xin, 2025. "How does service trade openness promote the green transformation of manufacturing firms? Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:144:y:2025:i:c:s0140988325001719
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988325001719
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eneco.2025.108347?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sherman Robinson & Zhi Wang & Will Martin, 2002. "Capturing the Implications of Services Trade Liberalization," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 3-33.
    2. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and the Environment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(1), pages 7-71, March.
    3. Ma, Yue & Tang, Heiwai & Zhang, Yifan, 2014. "Factor Intensity, product switching, and productivity: Evidence from Chinese exporters," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 349-362.
    4. Managi, Shunsuke & Hibiki, Akira & Tsurumi, Tetsuya, 2009. "Does trade openness improve environmental quality?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 346-363, November.
    5. Arnold, Jens M. & Javorcik, Beata S. & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2011. "Does services liberalization benefit manufacturing firms?: Evidence from the Czech Republic," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 136-146, September.
    6. Beverelli, Cosimo & Fiorini, Matteo & Hoekman, Bernard, 2017. "Services trade policy and manufacturing productivity: The role of institutions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 166-182.
    7. Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2018. "Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3814-3854, December.
    8. Blackman, Allen & Wu, Xun, 1999. "Foreign direct investment in china's power sector: trends, benefits and barriers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(12), pages 695-711, November.
    9. Manova, Kalina & Yu, Zhihong, 2017. "Multi-product firms and product quality," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 116-137.
    10. Matthew Cole, 2000. "Air Pollution and ‘Dirty’ Industries: How and Why Does the Composition of Manufacturing Output Change with Economic Development?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(1), pages 109-123, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Epifani, Paolo & Gancia, Gino, 2011. "Trade, markup heterogeneity and misallocations," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 1-13, January.
    13. Zong, Yi & Gu, Guoda, 2022. "The threshold effect of manufacturing Servitization on carbon emission: An empirical analysis based on multinational panel data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 353-364.
    14. Guglielmo Barone & Federico Cingano, 2011. "Service Regulation and Growth: Evidence from OECD Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(555), pages 931-957, September.
    15. Tianyu Fan & Michael Peters & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2023. "Growing Like India—the Unequal Effects of Service‐Led Growth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1457-1494, July.
    16. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 1994. "North-South Trade and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(3), pages 755-787.
    17. Oleksandr Shepotylo & Volodymyr Vakhitov, 2015. "Services liberalization and productivity of manufacturing firms," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 23(1), pages 1-44, January.
    18. Liu, Qing & Qiu, Larry D., 2016. "Intermediate input imports and innovations: Evidence from Chinese firms' patent filings," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 166-183.
    19. Galina Hale & Cheryl Long, 2006. "What Determines Technological Spillovers of Foreign Direct Investment: Evidence from China," Working Papers 934, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    20. 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.
    21. Anderson, James E. & Borchert, Ingo & Mattoo, Aaditya & Yotov, Yoto V., 2018. "Dark costs, missing data: Shedding some light on services trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 193-214.
    22. Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2003. "Bureaucratic corruption, environmental policy and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(7-8), pages 1407-1430, August.
    23. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2010. "Multiple-Product Firms and Product Switching," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 70-97, March.
    24. Baek, Jungho, 2016. "A new look at the FDI–income–energy–environment nexus: Dynamic panel data analysis of ASEAN," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 22-27.
    25. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco, 2008. "Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 447-460, June.
    26. Benjamin Faber & Cecile Gaubert, 2019. "Tourism and Economic Development: Evidence from Mexico's Coastline," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(6), pages 2245-2293, June.
    27. James E. Anderson & Catherine A. Milot & Yoto V. Yotov, 2014. "How Much Does Geography Deflect Services Trade? Canadian Answers," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(3), pages 791-818, August.
    28. Carsten Eckel & J. Peter Neary, 2010. "Multi-Product Firms and Flexible Manufacturing in the Global Economy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 188-217.
    29. Zhang, Zengkai & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Zhu, Kunfu, 2020. "Allocating carbon responsibility: The role of spatial production fragmentation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    30. Mauricio Larrain & Sebastian Stumpner, 2017. "Capital Account Liberalization and Aggregate Productivity: The Role of Firm Capital Allocation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1825-1858, August.
    31. Shuhong Wang & Xiaoli Sun & Malin Song, 2021. "Environmental Regulation, Resource Misallocation, and Ecological Efficiency," Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(3), pages 410-429, February.
    32. Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Harrison, Ann E., 2003. "Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 1-23, February.
    33. Morten Bennedsen & Stefan Zeume, 2018. "Corporate Tax Havens and Transparency," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 1221-1264.
    34. Shujin Zhu & Renyu Li & Tenglong Zhong, 2017. "How Does Trade Openness Affect Regional Demographic Transitions? Evidence from China's Provincial Panel Data," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 25(3), pages 112-130, May.
    35. Tang, Yiding & Zhu, Shujin & Luo, Yan & Duan, Wenjing, 2022. "Input servitization, global value chain, and carbon mitigation: An input-output perspective of global manufacturing industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    36. Peng, Shuijun & Shu, Zhongqiao & Zhang, Wencheng, 2022. "Does service trade liberalization relieve manufacturing enterprises’ financial constraints? Evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    37. James E. Anderson & Catherine A. Milot & Yoto V. Yotov, 2014. "How Much Does Geography Deflect Services Trade? Canadian Answers," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55, pages 791-818, August.
    38. Mongelli, I. & Tassielli, G. & Notarnicola, B., 2006. "Global warming agreements, international trade and energy/carbon embodiments: an input-output approach to the Italian case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 88-100, January.
    39. Lin, Faqin, 2017. "Trade openness and air pollution: City-level empirical evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 78-88.
    40. Xie, Enze & Xu, Mingzhi & Yu, Miaojie, 2024. "Trade liberalization, labor market power, and misallocation across firms: Evidence from China's WTO accession," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    41. Kwon, Jene K & Paik, Hoon, 1995. "Factor Price Distortions, Resource Allocation, and Growth: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(4), pages 664-676, November.
    42. Letchumanan, Raman & Kodama, Fumio, 2000. "Reconciling the conflict between the 'pollution-haven' hypothesis and an emerging trajectory of international technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, January.
    43. Jin, Zhida & Li, Zheng & Yang, Mian, 2022. "Producer services development and manufacturing carbon intensity: Evidence from an international perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    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. Zhuoran Bai & Shuang Meng & Zhuang Miao & Yan Zhang, 2023. "Liberalization for services foreign direct investment and product mix adjustment: Evidence from Chinese exporting firms," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 363-388, May.
    2. Huang, Geng & Lin, Xi & He, Ling-Yun, 2023. "Good for the environment? Foreign investment opening in service sector and firm's energy efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PA).
    3. Jevan M. Cherniwchan & M. Scott Taylor, 2022. "International Trade and the Environment: Three Remaining Empirical Challenges," NBER Working Papers 30020, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Ling-Yun He & Liang Wang, 2019. "Import Liberalization of Intermediates and Environment: Empirical Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Geoffrey Barrows & Helene Ollivier, 2016. "Emission intensity and firm dynamics: reallocation, product mix, and technology in India," GRI Working Papers 245, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    6. William Bekoe & Talatu Jalloh, 2023. "Assessing the Economic Implications of Free Trade on Environmental Quality: Empirical Evidence from Africa," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 19-36, January.
    7. He, Jie, 2006. "Pollution haven hypothesis and environmental impacts of foreign direct investment: The case of industrial emission of sulfur dioxide (SO2) in Chinese provinces," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 228-245, November.
    8. Dietzenbacher, Erik & Yan, Bingqian, 2024. "Explaining the direction of emissions embodied in trade from hypotheses based on country rankings11Funding information: Bingqian Yan received financial support from the National Natural Science Founda," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    9. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Mallick, Hrushikesh & Kumar, Mantu & Loganathan, Nanthakumar, 2015. "Does Globalization Impede Environmental Quality in India?," MPRA Paper 67285, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Oct 2015.
    10. He, Ling-Yun & Huang, Geng, 2021. "How can export improve firms’ energy efficiency? The role of innovation investment," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 90-97.
    11. Yiping Sun & Xiangyi Li & Tengyuan Zhang & Jiawei Fu, 2022. "Does Trade Policy Uncertainty Exacerbate Environmental Pollution?—Evidence from Chinese Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-21, February.
    12. Ajayi, Patricia & Ogunrinola, Adedeji, 2020. "Growth, Trade Openness and Environmental Degradation in Nigeria," MPRA Paper 100713, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2019. "Trade in Environmental Goods and Air Pollution: A Mediation Analysis to Estimate Total, Direct and Indirect Effects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1125-1162, November.
    14. Geng Huang & Xi Lin & Shuying Xu & Junyu Wang & Ling‐Yun He, 2025. "Trade policy uncertainty, export destination, and firm's pollution emissions: Analysis from theoretical perspective," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 46(4), pages 2181-2189, June.
    15. Malin Niemi & Nicklas Nordfors & Anna Tompsett, 2025. "Trade and pollution: Evidence from India," Papers 2502.09289, arXiv.org.
    16. Fumei He & Ke-Chiun Chang & Min Li & Xueping Li & Fangjhy Li, 2020. "Bootstrap ARDL Test on the Relationship among Trade, FDI, and CO 2 Emissions: Based on the Experience of BRICS Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Dhimitri Qirjo & Razvan Pascalau, 2019. "The Role of TTIP on the Environment," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(4), pages 1262-1285, April.
    18. Ling-Yun He & Geng Huang, 2020. "Tariff Reduction and Environment: Evidence from CAFTA and Chinese Manufacturing Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-25, March.
    19. Michael Schymura & Andreas Löschel, 2012. "Trade and the Environment: An Application of the WIOD Database," EcoMod2012 3948, EcoMod.
    20. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.

    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:eee:eneeco:v:144:y:2025:i:c:s0140988325001719. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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.