摘要
文章将环境自净能力指标纳入环境质量评价指标体系之中,基于TOPSIS综合评价原理,测算了2003-2014年中国30个省级经济单元的环境污染综合指数,研究了环境污染变动的驱动因素。结论认为,样本考察期内,东部地区环境质量最好,依次为西部和中部地区。分省份看,环境质量最好的省份依次为福建、天津、海南、青海、宁夏、新疆、云南、黑龙江;完成"十三五"减排目标,环境质量较差的湖南、山东、江西、四川、湖北、广东、辽宁等省份是重点监控省份,中西部的落后地区是重点监控地区。加大研发投入力度、提高经济发展水平及环境规制强度,均能够有效降低污染物的排放,环境污染具有一定的路径依赖性;外资进入恶化了中国的环境质量,区域层面"污染避难所"假说成立。据此提出了降低污染物排放、改善环境质量的对策建议。
The paper incorporates the environmental self purification ability index into the evaluation index system of environmental quality, calculates the comprehensive index of environmental pollution of 30 provincial-level economic units in China from 2003 to 2014 and studies the driving factors of environmental pollution based on the comprehensive evaluation principle of TOPSIS. The conclusions are that the environmental quality of the eastern region is the best, followed by the western and central regions in the period of sample survey; From the perspective of sub provinces, the province with the best environmental quality is Fujian, followed by Tianjin, Hainan, Qinghai, Ningx- ia, Xinjiang, Yunnan and Heilongjiang; From the perspective of completing the ＂13th Five-Year＂ emissions reduction targets, Hunan, Shandong, Jiangxi, Sichuan, Hubei, Guangdong, and Liaoning with poor environmental quality are the key monitoring provinces, and the backward areas of the Midwest are the focus of monitoring areas. Increasing R＆D investment and improving the level of economic development and the intensity of environmental regulation are able to effectively reduce the discharge of pollutants, and environmental pollution has a certain path dependence; Foreign capital investment worsens China＇ s environmental quality, regional level ＂pollution haven＂ hypothesis is established. Accordingly, the paper puts forward countermeasures and suggestions to reduce pollutant emissions and improve environmental quality.
出处
《华东经济管理》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第2期57-65,共9页
East China Economic Management
基金
国家社会科学基金项目(13BJY073)
西安市软科学计划研究项目(SF1505)
西安交通大学人文社会科学基金项目(sk2014033)
关键词
环境污染
综合评价
影响因素
区域差异
environmental pollution
comprehensive evaluation
influential factors
regional differences
