IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p6192-d1695681.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decoupling Analysis and Scenario Prediction of Port Carbon Emissions: A Case Study of Shanghai Port, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yuye Zou

    (School of Economics and Management, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China)

  • Ruyue Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China)

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive analysis of carbon emission trends and their driving factors at Shanghai Port, with a particular focus on the decoupling relationship between port economic development and carbon emissions, as well as forecasting the timeline for achieving the port’s carbon peak. The findings reveal distinct temporal patterns in emission growth: from 2009 to 2012, Shanghai Port experienced steady increases in carbon emissions, while from 2020 to 2023, it witnessed accelerated growth, primarily driven by fuel oil consumption. Using the Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) decomposition model, the study identifies operational revenue as the most significant contributor to carbon emission growth, while economic intensity emerges as the strongest inhibiting factor. Notably, the carbon-promoting effects of energy structure and efficiency improvements substantially outweigh the emission reductions achieved through enhanced economic intensity. The Tapio decoupling analysis indicates that during 2010–2023, neither operational revenue nor port cargo throughput capacity achieved stable decoupling from carbon emissions at Shanghai Port. Operational revenue exhibited alternating patterns of strong and weak decoupling, while cargo throughput showed more pronounced fluctuations, cycling through phases of decoupling and negative decoupling. Scenario-based predictions using the GRU-LSTM hybrid model provide critical insights: under the baseline scenario, Shanghai Port is projected to fail to achieve a carbon peak by 2035. However, both the low-carbon and enhanced mitigation scenarios project a carbon peak around 2026, with the enhanced scenario enabling earlier attainment of the target. These findings offer valuable theoretical foundations for formulating Shanghai Port’s carbon peak strategy and provide practical guidance for emission management and policy development at ports. The methodological framework and empirical results presented in this study may serve as a reference for other major ports pursuing similar decarbonization goals.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuye Zou & Ruyue Wang, 2025. "Decoupling Analysis and Scenario Prediction of Port Carbon Emissions: A Case Study of Shanghai Port, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-27, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:6192-:d:1695681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/6192/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/6192/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiaoyu Fang & Lin Ding & Meng Gao, 2025. "Carbon Emissions and Innovation Cities: A SHAP-Model-Based Study on Decoupling Trends and Policy Implications in Coastal China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-21, April.
    2. Huaping Sun & Lingxiang Hu & Yong Geng & Guangchuan Yang, 2020. "Uncovering impact factors of carbon emissions from transportation sector: evidence from China’s Yangtze River Delta Area," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 1423-1437, October.
    3. Javed Farhan & Ghim Ping Ong, 2018. "Forecasting seasonal container throughput at international ports using SARIMA models," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 20(1), pages 131-148, March.
    4. Villalba, Gara & Gemechu, Eskinder Demisse, 2011. "Estimating GHG emissions of marine ports--the case of Barcelona," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1363-1368, March.
    5. Rodrigo Saravia de los Reyes & Gonzalo Fernández-Sánchez & María Dolores Esteban & Raúl Rubén Rodríguez, 2020. "Carbon Footprint of a Port Infrastructure from a Life Cycle Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-15, October.
    6. Lv, Zhihan & Wang, Nana & Lou, Ranran & Tian, Yajun & Guizani, Mohsen, 2023. "Towards carbon Neutrality: Prediction of wave energy based on improved GRU in Maritime transportation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    7. Perčić, Maja & Ančić, Ivica & Vladimir, Nikola, 2020. "Life-cycle cost assessments of different power system configurations to reduce the carbon footprint in the Croatian short-sea shipping sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    8. Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los, 1998. "Structural Decomposition Techniques: Sense and Sensitivity," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 307-324.
    9. Yang, Tao & Pan, Yiqun & Yang, Yikun & Lin, Meishun & Qin, Bingyue & Xu, Peng & Huang, Zhizhong, 2017. "CO2 emissions in China's building sector through 2050: A scenario analysis based on a bottom-up model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 208-223.
    10. Zhong, Weiyi & Zhai, Dengshuai & Xu, Wenran & Gong, Wenwen & Yan, Chao & Zhang, Yang & Qi, Lianyong, 2024. "Accurate and efficient daily carbon emission forecasting based on improved ARIMA," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 376(PA).
    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. Nishijima, Daisuke, 2017. "The role of technology, product lifetime, and energy efficiency in climate mitigation: A case study of air conditioners in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 340-347.
    2. 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.
    3. Xie, Rui & Wang, Fangfang & Chevallier, Julien & Zhu, Bangzhu & Zhao, Guomei, 2018. "Supply-side structural effects of air pollutant emissions in China: A comparative analysis," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 89-95.
    4. Tuba Bakıcı & Esteve Almirall & Jonathan Wareham, 2013. "A Smart City Initiative: the Case of Barcelona," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(2), pages 135-148, June.
    5. Quintano, Claudio & Mazzocchi, Paolo & Rocca, Antonella, 2021. "Evaluation of the eco-efficiency of territorial districts with seaport economic activities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Erik Dietzenbacher & Jesper Stage, 2006. "Mixing oil and water? Using hybrid input-output tables in a Structural decomposition analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 85-95.
    7. Ling Yang & Michael L. Lahr, 2019. "The Drivers of China’s Regional Carbon Emission Change—A Structural Decomposition Analysis from 1997 to 2007," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Rosa Duarte & Vicente Pinilla & Ana Serrano, 2015. "Global water in a global world a long term study on agricultural virtual water flows in the world," Documentos de Trabajo dt2015-03, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    9. Mohlin, Kristina & Camuzeaux, Jonathan R. & Muller, Adrian & Schneider, Marius & Wagner, Gernot, 2018. "Factoring in the forgotten role of renewables in CO2 emission trends using decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 290-296.
    10. Arne J. Nagengast & Robert Stehrer, 2016. "Accounting for the Differences Between Gross and Value Added Trade Balances," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(9), pages 1276-1306, September.
    11. Roca, Jordi & Serrano, Monica, 2007. "Income growth and atmospheric pollution in Spain: An input-output approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 230-242, June.
    12. Butnar, Isabela & Llop, Maria, 2011. "Structural decomposition analysis and input-output subsystems: Changes in CO2 emissions of Spanish service sectors (2000-2005)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2012-2019, September.
    13. Fernández, Esteban & Fernández, Paula, 2008. "An extension to Sun's decomposition methodology: The Path Based approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 1020-1036, May.
    14. Zhao, Xiaoli & Li, Na & Ma, Chunbo, 2012. "Residential energy consumption in urban China: A decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 644-653.
    15. Gui, Shusen & Mu, Hailin & Li, Nan, 2014. "Analysis of impact factors on China's CO2 emissions from the view of supply chain paths," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 405-416.
    16. Mark De Haan, 2001. "A Structural Decomposition Analysis of Pollution in the Netherlands," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 181-196.
    17. Li, Jia Shuo & Zhou, H.W. & Meng, Jing & Yang, Q. & Chen, B. & Zhang, Y.Y., 2018. "Carbon emissions and their drivers for a typical urban economy from multiple perspectives: A case analysis for Beijing city," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 1076-1086.
    18. Guangying Jin & Wei Feng & Qingpu Meng, 2022. "Prediction of Waterway Cargo Transportation Volume to Support Maritime Transportation Systems Based on GA-BP Neural Network Optimization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-24, October.
    19. Tian, Kailan & Dietzenbacher, Erik & Yan, Bingqian & Duan, Yuwan, 2020. "Upgrading or downgrading: China's regional carbon emission intensity evolution and its determinants," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Mary Gregory & Giovanni Russo, 2004. "The Employment Impact of Differences in Dmand and Production," DEMPATEM Working Papers wp10, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:13:p:6192-:d:1695681. 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.