IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v15y2025i5p508-d1600429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Dynamic Changes in Carbon Footprints of Agricultural Production in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River

Author

Listed:
  • Zonggui He

    (Research Center of Agricultural Economy, School of Economics, Sichuan University of Science & Engineering, Zigong 643000, China)

  • Cuicui Jiao

    (Research Center of Agricultural Economy, School of Economics, Sichuan University of Science & Engineering, Zigong 643000, China)

  • Lanman Ou

    (Research Center of Agricultural Economy, School of Economics, Sichuan University of Science & Engineering, Zigong 643000, China)

Abstract

Taking six provinces and one city in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River as the main research object, this study investigated the carbon footprint of agricultural production in the region and promoted the development of agricultural carbon reduction. This study used the internationally mainstream IPCC emission factor method to calculate the carbon footprint of agricultural production, and selected indicators such as rural population, crop planting area, rural per capita GDP, and urbanization rate to analyze the influencing factors of agricultural carbon footprint in various provinces in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River based on an extensible STIRPAT model. Due to differences in agricultural production conditions, the carbon footprint per unit area and unit yield vary among provinces and cities in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River. From the 15 year average, the carbon footprint per unit area is synchronized with the carbon footprint per unit yield, with Zhejiang Province having the highest (9830.48 kg (CO 2 eq)/hm 2 , 0.65 kg (CO 2 eq)/kg), Hubei Province in the middle (5017.90 kg (CO 2 eq)/hm 2 , 0.54 kg (CO 2 eq)/kg), and Jiangxi Province having the lowest (3446.181 kg (CO 2 eq)/hm 2 , 0.46 kg (CO 2 eq)/kg). From the perspective of emission structure, the carbon footprint generated by agricultural resource inputs accounts for the largest proportion, with fertilizer and fuel use being the main contributors to emissions. In the analysis of influencing factors, the indicators that mainly promote the carbon footprint of agricultural production include the following: rural population (R), ratio of agricultural value added to GDP(Z), total sown area of crops (B), level of agricultural technology (total power of agricultural machinery) (J), and degree of agricultural mechanization (N). The indicators that mainly inhibit the carbon footprint of agricultural production include the per capita disposable income of rural residents (P), rural GDP per capita (G), and urbanization rate (C). Other indicators have a relatively weak impact on carbon footprint. Overall, optimizing agricultural resource input, improving mechanized productivity, and reasonably controlling fertilizers are important ways of reducing carbon emissions from agricultural production. In the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, it is still necessary to formulate emission reduction measures tailored to different ecological environment characteristics to achieve sustainable agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Zonggui He & Cuicui Jiao & Lanman Ou, 2025. "Analysis of Dynamic Changes in Carbon Footprints of Agricultural Production in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-27, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:5:p:508-:d:1600429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/5/508/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/5/508/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. York, Richard & Rosa, Eugene A. & Dietz, Thomas, 2003. "STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 351-365, October.
    2. Shafiei, Sahar & Salim, Ruhul A., 2014. "Non-renewable and renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A comparative analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 547-556.
    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. Xiaoxia Shi & Haiyun Liu & Joshua Sunday Riti, 2019. "The role of energy mix and financial development in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions’ reduction: evidence from ten leading CO2 emitting countries," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(3), pages 695-729, October.
    2. Squalli, Jay, 2017. "Renewable energy, coal as a baseload power source, and greenhouse gas emissions: Evidence from U.S. state-level data," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 479-488.
    3. Laureti, Tiziana & Montero, José-María & Fernández-Avilés, Gema, 2014. "A local scale analysis on influencing factors of NOx emissions: Evidence from the Community of Madrid, Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 557-568.
    4. Muhammad Shahbaz & Avik Sinha, 2019. "Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2emissions: a literature survey," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 46(1), pages 106-168, January.
    5. Jin, Taeyoung & Kim, Jinsoo, 2018. "What is better for mitigating carbon emissions – Renewable energy or nuclear energy? A panel data analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 464-471.
    6. Fei Wang & Changjian Wang & Jing Chen & Zeng Li & Ling Li, 2020. "Examining the determinants of energy-related carbon emissions in Central Asia: country-level LMDI and EKC analysis during different phases," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7743-7769, December.
    7. Li, Ke & Lin, Boqiang, 2015. "Impacts of urbanization and industrialization on energy consumption/CO2 emissions: Does the level of development matter?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1107-1122.
    8. Vélez-Henao, Johan-Andrés & Font Vivanco, David & Hernández-Riveros, Jesús-Antonio, 2019. "Technological change and the rebound effect in the STIRPAT model: A critical view," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1372-1381.
    9. Wang, Shaojian & Zeng, Jingyuan & Liu, Xiaoping, 2019. "Examining the multiple impacts of technological progress on CO2 emissions in China: A panel quantile regression approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 140-150.
    10. Ramlall, Indranarain, 2017. "Internalizing CO2 emissions via central banks’ financials: Evidence from the world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 549-559.
    11. Jin, Taeyoung, 2022. "The evolutionary renewable energy and mitigation impact in OECD countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 570-586.
    12. Yuan Yuan & Ping Xu & Hui Zhang, 2023. "Spatial Zoning of Carbon Dioxide Emissions at the Intra-City Level: A Case Study of Nanjing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-19, February.
    13. AGUIR BARGAOUI, Saoussen, 2019. "Carbon dioxide emissions mitigation strategies’ performance," MPRA Paper 103853, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Xixuan Guo & Kaixiang Huang & Lanyu Li & Xiaonan Wang, 2022. "Renewable Energy for Balancing Carbon Emissions and Reducing Carbon Transfer under Global Value Chains: A Way Forward," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Sun, Yunpeng & Anwar, Ahsan & Razzaq, Asif & Liang, Xueping & Siddique, Muhammad, 2022. "Asymmetric role of renewable energy, green innovation, and globalization in deriving environmental sustainability: Evidence from top-10 polluted countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 280-290.
    16. Md Samsul Alam & Nicholas Apergis & Sudharshan Reddy Paramati & Jianchun Fang, 2021. "The impacts of R&D investment and stock markets on clean‐energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD economies," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 4979-4992, October.
    17. Wang, Changjian & Wang, Fei & Zhang, Xinlin & Yang, Yu & Su, Yongxian & Ye, Yuyao & Zhang, Hongou, 2017. "Examining the driving factors of energy related carbon emissions using the extended STIRPAT model based on IPAT identity in Xinjiang," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 51-61.
    18. Lapatinas, Athanasios & Garas, Antonios & Boleti, Eirini & Kyriakou, Alexandra, 2019. "Economic complexity and environmental performance: Evidence from a world sample," MPRA Paper 92833, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Paramati, Sudharshan Reddy & Mo, Di & Gupta, Rakesh, 2017. "The effects of stock market growth and renewable energy use on CO2 emissions: Evidence from G20 countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 360-371.
    20. Jacob Otim & Susan Watundu & John Mutenyo & Vincent Bagire, 2023. "Fossil Fuel Energy Consumption, Economic Growth, Urbanization, and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Kenya," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(3), pages 457-468, 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:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:5:p:508-:d:1600429. 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.