IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i3p829-d312077.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Path Analysis of Beijing’s Dematerialization Development Based on System Dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • Tiejun Dai

    (College of Economics & Management, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China)

  • Shuo Shan

    (College of Economics & Management, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China)

Abstract

Dematerialization is a phenomenon in which resource consumption and pollutant discharge decrease during economic development. In order to explore the optimal paths of Beijing’s dematerialization, this study combines material flow analysis method and the Tapio decoupling model to construct a city dematerialization evaluation model, and establishes a system dynamics model to simulate the comprehensive dematerialization levels and the dematerialization levels of eight materials under four scenarios. The results show that the key factors affecting the dematerialization levels of resource and discharge end were non-metals consumption and CO 2 emissions respectively. During 2016–2030, Beijing would achieve weak decoupling state under four scenarios, but the degree of dematerialization would be different. For the comprehensive dematerialization level, during 2017–2024, an industrial restructuring (IR) scenario, which would strengthen R&D investment and optimize the industrial structure, would be the optimal choice. During 2025–2030, an environmental governance (EG) scenario, which means increasing the investment in pollution control, would bring about the best dematerialization level. There would be differences in the optimal dematerialization paths for eight materials. For example, economic sustainable degrowth (ESD) and EG scenarios would be the optimal paths for dematerialization of atmospheric pollutants in the period 2017–2021 and 2022–2030, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiejun Dai & Shuo Shan, 2020. "Path Analysis of Beijing’s Dematerialization Development Based on System Dynamics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:829-:d:312077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/829/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/829/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pothen, Frank & Welsch, Heinz, 2019. "Economic development and material use. Evidence from international panel data," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 107-119.
    2. Tapio, Petri, 2005. "Towards a theory of decoupling: degrees of decoupling in the EU and the case of road traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 137-151, March.
    3. Shasha Wang & Rongrong Li, 2018. "Toward the Coordinated Sustainable Development of Urban Water Resource Use and Economic Growth: An Empirical Analysis of Tianjin City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, April.
    4. Zhang, Chao & Chen, Wei-Qiang & Liu, Gang & Zhu, Da-Jian, 2017. "Economic Growth and the Evolution of Material Cycles: An Analytical Framework Integrating Material Flow and Stock Indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 265-274.
    5. Tiejun Dai & Wanjun Wang, 2018. "The Characteristics and Trends of Socioeconomic Metabolism in China," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1228-1240, October.
    6. Fangzheng Li & Yinan Sun & Xiong Li & Xinhua Hao & Wanyi Li & Yun Qian & Haimeng Liu & Haiyan Sun, 2016. "Research on the Sustainable Development of Green-Space in Beijing Using the Dynamic Systems Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Cutler J. Cleveland & Matthias Ruth, 1998. "Indicators of Dematerialization and the Materials Intensity of Use," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 2(3), pages 15-50, July.
    8. Andrea Bigano & Aleksander Śniegocki & Jacopo Zotti, 2016. "Policies for a More Dematerialized EU Economy. Theoretical Underpinnings, Political Context and Expected Feasibility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-22, July.
    9. Fernandez, Viviana, 2018. "Mineral commodity consumption and intensity of use re-assessed," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1-18.
    10. Francesca Montevecchi, 2016. "Policy Mixes to Achieve Absolute Decoupling: A Case Study of Municipal Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-22, May.
    11. Kan, Siyi & Chen, Bin & Chen, Guoqian, 2019. "Worldwide energy use across global supply chains: Decoupled from economic growth?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 1235-1245.
    12. An, Runying & Yu, Biying & Li, Ru & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2018. "Potential of energy savings and CO2 emission reduction in China’s iron and steel industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 862-880.
    13. Xiaoping Zhu & Rongrong Li, 2017. "An Analysis of Decoupling and Influencing Factors of Carbon Emissions from the Transportation Sector in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, April.
    14. Hao, Yu & Zhang, Tianli & Jing, Leijie & Xiao, Linqi, 2019. "Would the decoupling of electricity occur along with economic growth? Empirical evidence from the panel data analysis for 100 Chinese cities," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 615-625.
    15. Zhe Wang & Lin Zhao & Guozhu Mao & Ben Wu, 2015. "Eco-Efficiency Trends and Decoupling Analysis of Environmental Pressures in Tianjin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-16, November.
    16. Sheng, Yu & Song, Ligang, 2019. "Agricultural production and food consumption in China: A long-term projection," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 15-29.
    17. Krausmann, Fridolin & Gingrich, Simone & Eisenmenger, Nina & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Haberl, Helmut & Fischer-Kowalski, Marina, 2009. "Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2696-2705, August.
    18. Crompton, Paul, 2015. "Explaining variation in steel consumption in the OECD," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 239-246.
    19. Sylvia Gierlinger & Fridolin Krausmann, 2012. "The Physical Economy of the United States of America," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(3), pages 365-377, June.
    20. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    21. Frank Pothen & Heinz Welsch, 2017. "Economic Development and Material Use," Working Papers V-399-17, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2017.
    22. Kallis, Giorgos, 2011. "In defence of degrowth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 873-880, March.
    23. Ayres, Robert U & Kneese, Allen V, 1969. "Production , Consumption, and Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 282-297, June.
    24. Naqvi, Asjad & Zwickl, Klara, 2017. "Fifty shades of green: Revisiting decoupling by economic sectors and air pollutants," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 111-126.
    25. Zhang, Dongyu & Liu, Gengyuan & Chen, Caocao & Zhang, Yan & Hao, Yan & Casazza, Marco, 2019. "Medium-to-long-term coupled strategies for energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reduction in Beijing (China)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 350-360.
    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. João Leitão & Joaquim Ferreira, 2021. "Dynamic Effects of Material Production and Environmental Sustainability on Economic Vitality Indicators: A Panel VAR Approach," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Katarzyna Frodyma & Monika Papież & Sławomir Śmiech, 2020. "Decoupling Economic Growth from Fossil Fuel Use—Evidence from 141 Countries in the 25-Year Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Nelson, Ewan & Warren, Peter, 2020. "UK transport decoupling: On track for clean growth in transport?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-51.
    4. Fernández-Herrero, Laura & Duro, Juan Antonio, 2019. "What causes inequality in Material Productivity between countries?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1-16.
    5. Ji Zheng & Yingjie Hu & Suocheng Dong & Yu Li, 2019. "The Spatiotemporal Pattern of Decoupling Transport CO 2 Emissions from Economic Growth across 30 Provinces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Kalimeris, Panos & Bithas, Kostas & Richardson, Clive & Nijkamp, Peter, 2020. "Hidden linkages between resources and economy: A “Beyond-GDP” approach using alternative welfare indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Song, Yi & Cheng, Jinhua & Zhang, Yijun & Dai, Tao & Huang, Jianbai, 2021. "Direct and indirect effects of heterogeneous technical change on metal consumption intensity: Evidence from G7 and BRICS countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Patricia Urban & Markus Hametner, 2022. "The Economy–Environment Nexus: Sustainable Development Goals Interlinkages in Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    9. Barbier, Edward B. & Burgess, Joanne C., 2019. "Sustainable development goal indicators: Analyzing trade-offs and complementarities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 295-305.
    10. Yang, Xue & Zhang, Chao & Li, Xinyi & Cao, Zhi & Wang, Peng & Wang, Heming & Liu, Gang & Xia, Ziqian & Zhu, Dajian & Chen, Wei-Qiang, 2024. "Multinational dynamic steel cycle analysis reveals sequential decoupling between material use and economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    11. Lange, Steffen & Pohl, Johanna & Santarius, Tilman, 2020. "Digitalization and energy consumption. Does ICT reduce energy demand?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    12. Xue, Jin, 2014. "Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 130-138.
    13. Marco Bianchi & Carlos Tapia & Ikerne del Valle, 2020. "Monitoring domestic material consumption at lower territorial levels: A novel data downscaling method," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1074-1087, October.
    14. Julia K Steinberger & Fridolin Krausmann & Michael Getzner & Heinz Schandl & Jim West, 2013. "Development and Dematerialization: An International Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-11, October.
    15. Yoshida, Keisuke & Fishman, Tomer & Okuoka, Keijiro & Tanikawa, Hiroki, 2017. "Material stock's overburden: Automatic spatial detection and estimation of domestic extraction and hidden material flows," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 165-175.
    16. Tobias Wendler, 2019. "About the Relationship Between Green Technology and Material Usage," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1383-1423, November.
    17. Figge, Frank & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson, 2023. "Circular economy, operational eco-efficiency, and sufficiency. An integrated view," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PB).
    18. Liang, Wei & Gan, Ting & Zhang, Wei, 2019. "Dynamic evolution of characteristics and decomposition of factors influencing industrial carbon dioxide emissions in China: 1991–2015," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 93-106.
    19. Dorothée Charlier & Florian Fizaine, 2020. "Does Becoming Richer Lead to a Reduction in Natural Resource Consumption? An Empirical Refutation of the Kuznets Material Curve," Working Papers 2020.05, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    20. Fishman, Tomer & Schandl, Heinz & Tanikawa, Hiroki, 2015. "The socio-economic drivers of material stock accumulation in Japan's prefectures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 76-84.

    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:12:y:2020:i:3:p:829-:d:312077. 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.