IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p5819-d559815.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Time-Series Investigation of China and U.S. Manufacturing Industries’ Global Supply-Chain-Linked Economic, Mid and End-Point Environmental Impacts

Author

Listed:
  • Mustafa Saber

    (Supply Chain Consultant at Logexsoft, Richmond, VA 23236, USA)

  • Gökhan Eğilmez

    (Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of New Haven, West Haven, CT 06516, USA)

  • Ridvan Gedik

    (Barney Barnett School of Business and Free Enterprise, Florida Southern College, Lakeland, FL 33801, USA)

  • Yong Shin Park

    (Department of Marketing, Operations, and Analytics, St. Edward’s University, Austin, TX 78704, USA)

Abstract

Manufacturing activities of China and the U.S. account for a substantial portion of the global manufacturing output and environmental sustainability impacts. The two countries’ economies account for one third of the global economic output. Their supply chains are critically linked with and serve most of the production and service industries across the globe. Recent global trends in manufacturing necessitate a study that comparatively analyzes the two countries’ manufacturing industries from an economic and environmental perspective. In this paper, U.S. and China manufacturing industries were investigated to analyze the economic and mid and endpoint environmental impacts over a 20-year study period. The literature is abundant with single period and single country focused works, and this study contributes to the state-of-art by extending the temporal dimension to 20 years and spatial focus to the global economy (40 countries and rest of the world). In terms of the methodology, Multi-region input-output (MRIO) models were built using the World Input-Output Database (WIOD) as the primary database, global input-output tables, environmental impact and economic output multipliers, and manufacturing industries’ final demand. Twenty MRIO models, each comprised of 40 major economies and the rest of the world (ROW), were built to cover the global trade linkages, which yielded the global supply chain linked cradle-to-gate life cycle inventory (LCI) of economic outputs and environmental impacts. The environmental LCI was extended to midpoint (Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP)) and endpoint (human health and ecosystem) impact dimensions by ReCipe framework. Lastly, the relative impact of a unit change in Leontief inverse, final demand and Green House Gas (GHG) emission multipliers on the total economic output and environmental impacts were explored with structural decomposition analysis (SDA). Results indicated that both countries’ manufacturing industries experienced positive economic output growth, in which China was more dominant in recent years. Both countries’ manufacturing industries’ midpoint and endpoint impacts were found to be steeply rising despite the negative growth observed in emissions intensities. The amount of GHG emissions and related midpoint (global warming and ozone depletion) and endpoint (damage to ecosystems and human life) impacts seemed to be quickly worsening in China compared to the USA.

Suggested Citation

  • Mustafa Saber & Gökhan Eğilmez & Ridvan Gedik & Yong Shin Park, 2021. "A Comparative Time-Series Investigation of China and U.S. Manufacturing Industries’ Global Supply-Chain-Linked Economic, Mid and End-Point Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5819-:d:559815
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5819/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5819/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhavik Bakshi & Mitchell J. Small, 2011. "Incorporating Ecosystem Services Into Life Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 15(4), pages 477-478, August.
    2. Marcel P. Timmer & Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los & Robert Stehrer & Gaaitzen J. Vries, 2015. "An Illustrated User Guide to the World Input–Output Database: the Case of Global Automotive Production," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 575-605, August.
    3. Jintai Lin & Mingxi Du & Lulu Chen & Kuishuang Feng & Yu Liu & Randall V. Martin & Jingxu Wang & Ruijing Ni & Yu Zhao & Hao Kong & Hongjian Weng & Mengyao Liu & Aaron van Donkelaar & Qiuyu Liu & Klaus, 2019. "Carbon and health implications of trade restrictions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Pan, Shu-Yuan & Lin, Yupo J. & Snyder, Seth W. & Ma, Hwong-Wen & Chiang, Pen-Chi, 2016. "Assessing the environmental impacts and water consumption of pretreatment and conditioning processes of corn stover hydrolysate liquor in biorefineries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 436-444.
    5. Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los, 1998. "Structural Decomposition Techniques: Sense and Sensitivity," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 307-324.
    6. Rose, A. & Chen, C. Y., 1991. "Sources of change in energy use in the U.S. economy, 1972-1982 : A structural decomposition analysis," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, April.
    7. Wiedmann, Thomas & Wilting, Harry C. & Lenzen, Manfred & Lutter, Stephan & Palm, Viveka, 2011. "Quo Vadis MRIO? Methodological, data and institutional requirements for multi-region input-output analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1937-1945, September.
    8. Zhang, Chao & Anadon, Laura Diaz, 2014. "A multi-regional input–output analysis of domestic virtual water trade and provincial water footprint in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 159-172.
    9. Liu, Li-Jing & Creutzig, Felix & Yao, Yun-Fei & Wei, Yi-Ming & Liang, Qiao-Mei, 2020. "Environmental and economic impacts of trade barriers: The example of China–US trade friction," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. Leontief, Wassily, 1970. "Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 52(3), pages 262-271, August.
    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. Krishanu Roy & Aflah Alamsah Dani & Vince Say & Zhiyuan Fang & James B. P. Lim, 2022. "The Circular Economy of Steel Roofing and Cladding and Its Environmental Impacts—A Case Study for New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.

    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. Kulionis, Viktoras & Wood, Richard, 2020. "Explaining decoupling in high income countries: A structural decomposition analysis of the change in energy footprint from 1970 to 2009," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    2. Kirsten S. Wiebe, 2016. "The impact of renewable energy diffusion on European consumption-based emissions," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 133-150, June.
    3. Fernando Bermejo & Raúl del Pozo & Pablo Moya, 2021. "Main Factors Determining the Economic Production Sustained by Public Long-Term Care Spending in Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Ling Li & Ling Tang & Junrong Zhang, 2019. "Coupling Structural Decomposition Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis to Investigate CO 2 Emission Intensity in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, June.
    5. K. Shironitta, 2016. "Global structural changes and their implication for territorial CO2 emissions," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Cansino, José M. & Román, Rocío & Ordóñez, Manuel, 2016. "Main drivers of changes in CO2 emissions in the Spanish economy: A structural decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 150-159.
    7. Tang, Zhipeng & Yu, Haojie & Zou, Jialing, 2022. "How does production substitution affect China's embodied carbon emissions in exports?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Ninpanit, Panittra & Malik, Arunima & Wakiyama, Takako & Geschke, Arne & Lenzen, Manfred, 2019. "Thailand’s energy-related carbon dioxide emissions from production-based and consumption-based perspectives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    9. Huang, Jian-Bai & Chen, Xi & Song, Yi, 2020. "What drives embodied metal consumption in China's imports and exports," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    10. Ali, Yousaf & Pretaroli, Rosita & Socci, Claudio & Severini, Francesca, 2018. "Carbon and water footprint accounts of Italy: A Multi-Region Input-Output approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1813-1824.
    11. Tarancon, Miguel Angel & Del Río, Pablo, 2012. "Assessing energy-related CO2 emissions with sensitivity analysis and input-output techniques," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 161-170.
    12. Zhipeng Tang & Shuang Wu & Jialing Zou, 2020. "Consumption substitution and change of household indirect energy consumption in China between 1997 and 2012," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, August.
    13. Magnus Jiborn & Viktoras Kulionis & Astrid Kander, 2020. "Consumption versus Technology: Drivers of Global Carbon Emissions 2000–2014," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, January.
    14. Jesper Stage, 2002. "Structural Shifts In Namibian Energy Use: An Input‐Output Approach," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 70(6), pages 1103-1125, September.
    15. Kucukvar, Murat & Haider, Muhammad Ali & Onat, Nuri Cihat, 2017. "Exploring the material footprints of national electricity production scenarios until 2050: The case for Turkey and UK," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 251-263.
    16. Yang, Honghua & Ma, Linwei & Li, Zheng, 2023. "Tracing China's steel use from steel flows in the production system to steel footprints in the consumption system," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    17. Airebule, Palizha & Cheng, Haitao & Ishikawa, Jota, 2023. "Assessing carbon emissions embodied in international trade based on shared responsibility," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Boglioni, Michele & Zambelli, Stefano, 2018. "Specialization patterns and reduction of CO2 emissions. An empirical investigation of environmental preservation and economic efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 134-149.
    19. Yannic Rehm & Lucas Chancel, 2022. "Measuring the Carbon Content of Wealth Evidence from France and Germany," PSE Working Papers halshs-03828939, HAL.
    20. Muhammet Enis Bulak & Murat Kucukvar, 2022. "How ecoefficient is European food consumption? A frontier‐based multiregional input–output analysis," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 817-832, October.

    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:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5819-:d:559815. 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.