IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i1p104-d720811.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological Efficiency of Urban Industrial Land in Metropolitan Areas: Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Lei Li

    (College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Chenzi Pan

    (College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Shuai Ling

    (College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

  • Mingqi Li

    (College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China)

Abstract

Industrial land is an indispensable strategic resource in urban development that plays an indispensable role in ensuring the industrial space of urban construction and development. Measuring and analyzing the eco-efficiency of industrial land utilization (ECILU) can provide insights into how to maximize the input–output ratio of industrial land and ensure the sustainable development of land resources and economies. Based on the undesirable output slacks-based measure (SBM) model, choosing land, capital, and labor as input indicators, and the industrial added value and carbon emissions as desirable and undesirable output indicators, this study measured the ECILUs in 78 cities and 13 metropolitan areas in four Chinese major economic zones from 2007 to 2018, analyzed their spatial and temporal evolution characteristics and regional differences, and constructed a Tobit regression model to test the influence mechanism of each variable on the ECILUs in different regions. This has important theoretical and practical significance for the Chinese government in formulating relevant policies and realizing the green utilization of urban land in the future. Empirical results showed that the ECILUs in most cities were low and that the differences between regions were large. The ECILU in the Western Economic Zone was relatively high, followed by the Eastern, Central, and Northeastern Economic Zones. According to the ECILU value and urban synergy degree of each metropolitan area, this study divided the 13 metropolitan areas into four categories. The regression analysis results showed that the variables had different effects on the ECILUs of all cities and the four economic zones in China. It is suggested that all economic zones should reinforce the optimization of industrial structure, control industrial pollutant discharge, and solve the phenomenon of labor surplus. The Eastern Zone should maintain the growth of its economy while focusing on soil quality. The Central Zone should focus on the efficient use of infrastructure, and the Western, Northeastern, and Central Zones should balance the green coverage area and the industrial land area to ensure the efficient use of urban industrial land.

Suggested Citation

  • Lei Li & Chenzi Pan & Shuai Ling & Mingqi Li, 2022. "Ecological Efficiency of Urban Industrial Land in Metropolitan Areas: Evidence from China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:104-:d:720811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/1/104/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/1/104/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krekel, Christian & Kolbe, Jens & Wüstemann, Henry, 2016. "The greener, the happier? The effect of urban land use on residential well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-127.
    2. Wu, Qiyan & Zhang, Xiaoling & Shang, Zhengyong & Li, Zaijun, 2015. "Political-economy based institutional industry complex and sustainable development: The case of the salt-chemical industry in Huai’an, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 39-47.
    3. Korhonen, Pekka J. & Luptacik, Mikulas, 2004. "Eco-efficiency analysis of power plants: An extension of data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 437-446, April.
    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. Fei Xie & Shuaibing Zhang & Kaixu Zhao & Fengmei Quan, 2022. "Evolution Mode, Influencing Factors, and Socioeconomic Value of Urban Industrial Land Management in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-33, September.
    2. Xiaolan Chen & Kaikai Wang & Guanjiang Wan & Yufei Liu & Wenbin Liu & Wanfang Shen & Jianing Shi, 2022. "Evaluation and Empirical Research on Eco-Efficiency of Financial Industry Based on Carbon Footprint in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Bingqing Li & Zhanqi Wang & Ji Chai, 2022. "Verifying the Synthesized Effects of Intensive Urban Land Use on Quality of Life, Ecology, and Urban-Land-Use Scale in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Jie Yu & Wei Zhao & Junjun Zhu, 2023. "The Construction of Chinese Metropolitan Area from the Perspective of Politics of Scale: A Case Study of Nanjing Metropolitan Area, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Jihong Li & Kaiming Li & Rongxu Qiu, 2022. "The Suburbanization and Revitalization of Industrial Land in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, June.

    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. Andrew E. Clark, 2018. "Four Decades of the Economics of Happiness: Where Next?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(2), pages 245-269, June.
    2. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Tyurina, Elena & Nagapetyan, Artur, 2022. "The economic value of the Glass Beach: Contingent valuation and life satisfaction approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Li, Jianglong & Lin, Boqiang, 2017. "Does energy and CO2 emissions performance of China benefit from regional integration?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 366-378.
    5. R Ramanathan, 2005. "Estimating energy consumption of transport modes in India using DEA and application to energy and environmental policy," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(6), pages 732-737, June.
    6. Trinks, Arjan & Mulder, Machiel & Scholtens, Bert, 2020. "An Efficiency Perspective on Carbon Emissions and Financial Performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Environmental assessment on coal-fired power plants in U.S. north-east region by DEA non-radial measurement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 125-139.
    8. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "Investment strategy for sustainable society by development of regional economies and prevention of industrial pollutions in Japanese manufacturing sectors," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 299-312.
    9. M. Lábaj & M. Luptáčik & E. Nežinský, 2014. "Data envelopment analysis for measuring economic growth in terms of welfare beyond GDP," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(3), pages 407-424, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Jaraitė, Jūratė & Di Maria, Corrado, 2012. "Efficiency, productivity and environmental policy: A case study of power generation in the EU," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1557-1568.
    12. Weiping Zhang & Peiji Shi & Huali Tong, 2022. "Research on Construction Land Use Benefit and the Coupling Coordination Relationship Based on a Three-Dimensional Frame Model—A Case Study in the Lanzhou-Xining Urban Agglomeration," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Valeriy Victorovich Iosifov & Nairuhi Akopovna Almastyan & Alessandro Figus & Yuri Chepurko & Nguy?n Ho ng Hi?n & Marina Alexandrovna Krotova, 2017. "The problem of Harmonizing the Environmental Priorities of Electricity Generating Companies and Regional Socio-Economic Systems: DEA-based Approach," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(5), pages 159-165.
    14. Thanasis Ziogas & Dimitris Ballas & Sierdjan Koster & Arjen Edzes, 2020. "How happy are my neighbours? Modelling spatial spillover effects of well-being," Papers 2007.11580, arXiv.org.
    15. Xiangxiang Sun & Lawrence Loh, 2019. "Sustainability Governance in China: An Analysis of Regional Ecological Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, April.
    16. Khoshroo, Alireza & Izadikhah, Mohammad & Emrouznejad, Ali, 2022. "Total factor energy productivity considering undesirable pollutant outputs: A new double frontier based malmquist productivity index," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    17. Li, Feng & Zhang, Danlu & Zhang, Jinyu & Kou, Gang, 2022. "Measuring the energy production and utilization efficiency of Chinese thermal power industry with the fixed-sum carbon emission constraint," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    18. Krekel, Christian & Rechlitz, Julia & Rode, Johannes & Zerrahn, Alexander, 2020. "Quantifying the Externalities of Renewable Energy Plants Using Wellbeing Data: The Case of Biogas," IZA Discussion Papers 13959, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2011. "Methodological comparison between two unified (operational and environmental) efficiency measurements for environmental assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(3), pages 684-693, May.
    20. Mercedes Beltrán-Esteve & José Gómez-Limón & Andrés Picazo-Tadeo & Ernest Reig-Martínez, 2014. "A metafrontier directional distance function approach to assessing eco-efficiency," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 69-83, 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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:104-:d:720811. 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.