Environment-biased technological progress and industrial land-use efficiency in China’s new normal

The slow growth of the Chinese economy has led to a reduced number of environmental regulations. This study aims to establish whether China’s “new normal” economy can stimulate environment-biased technological progress to improve industrial land-use efficiency. First, we set up a two-sector theoretical model where in the new normal is treated as an exogenous variable to analyze the combined effects of technological progress, industrial land-use efficiency, and environmental regulations. Then, we establish a multi-index and multi-indicator constitutive equation, in which environment-biased technological progress is taken as an intermediate variable. The results show that the effects of weak environmental regulations on environment-biased technological progress are not significant and that China’s new normal economy can stimulate the progress of clean technology, thereby improving industrial land-use efficiency. Finally, foreign direct investment restricts the improvement of industrial land-use efficiency.

[1]  Malin Song,et al.  Can employment structure promote environment-biased technical progress? , 2016 .

[2]  Jiang Xing-san.  Financial Risks of Land Financing by Local Governments——Case Study of a Developed Area in East China , 2005 .

[3]  Rolf Färe,et al.  Pollution Abatement and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States , 2009 .

[4]  Rebeka Tennent,et al.  Vale Landcare: the rise and decline of community-based natural resource management in rural Australia , 2013 .

[5]  S. Grosskopf,et al.  PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH IN APEC COUNTRIES , 1996 .

[6]  D. Acemoglu.  Labor- and Capital- Augmenting Technical Change , 2000 .

[7]  D. Giles,et al.  JEL Classification(s): , 1999 .

[8]  Helu Xiao,et al.  Estimation of portfolio efficiency via DEA , 2015 .

[9]  Tingwei Zhang.  Land market forces and government's role in sprawl , 2000 .

[10]  Espagne Etienne,et al.  The Environment and Directed Technical Change: Comment , 2011 .

[11]  John L. Herbohn,et al.  Engaging Australian small-scale lifestyle landowners in natural resource management programmes – Perceptions, past experiences and policy implications , 2014 .

[12]  Irena Hajnsek,et al.  A Network of Terrestrial Environmental Observatories in Germany , 2011 .

[13]  Zhiqing Dong,et al.  The direction of technical change: a study based on the inter-provincial panel data of China , 2013 .

[14]  Daron Acemoglu,et al.  Offshoring and Directed Technical Change , 2012 .

[15]  Fabrizio Cesaroni,et al.  Environmental Technologies in the European Chemical Industry , 2001 .

[16]  G. Grossman,et al.  Economic Growth and the Environment , 1994 .

[17]  E. Lambin,et al.  Proximate causes of land-use change in Narok District, Kenya: a spatial statistical model , 2001 .

[18]  Xavier Pons,et al.  Land-cover and land-use change in a Mediterranean landscape: A spatial analysis of driving forces integrating biophysical and human factors , 2008 .

[19]  David Popp,et al.  Entice: Endogenous Technological Change in the Dice Model of Global Warming , 2003 .

[20]  P. Aghion,et al.  The Environment and Directed Technical Change , 2009, The American economic review.

[21]  Ali İhsan Kadıoğulları,et al.  Spatial and temporal dynamics of land use pattern in Turkey: A case study in İnegöl , 2007 .

[22]  Malin Song,et al.  Review of hidden carbon emissions, trade, and labor income share in China, 2001–2011 , 2014 .