Effects of Chinese-style fiscal decentralization on carbon emissions: is there a role for urban construction investment bonds?

Figures & data

Figure 1. Spatial and temporal evolution of carbon emissions. (a) Trend of total carbon emissions; (b) trends of per capita carbon emissions.

Source: calculated by the authors and drawn using Origin software.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and definitions of variables.

Variables	Definition	Observation	Mean	Std. dev.	Min	Max
CO2	Per capita carbon emissions	3,724	0.114	1.130	−3.315	3.547
FD	Fiscal decentralization	3,724	0.481	0.223	0.055	1.541
Innovation	Technology Innovation	3,724	6.703	1.723	1.792	12.023
Greenery	Greenery rate	3,724	0.388	0.0747	0.00590	0.953
Industry	Secondary Industry Structure	3,724	0.483	0.104	0.107	0.910
Fdi	Foreign Direct Investment	3,724	9.799	1.844	1.099	14.55
Popolation	Total population	3,724	5.886	0.642	3.400	7.313
Openness	Degree of openness to the outside world	3,724	13.71	2.006	7.223	19.62
House	Real estate industry development	3,724	13.82	1.312	9.268	17.34
UCIB	Urban construction investment bonds	3,724	36.37	99.02	0	1,326
Accumulated-UCIB	Accumulated urban construction investment bonds	3,724	141.6	420.8	0	6,105

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Table 2. Model applicability test.

Test Method	Statistical values	P-values
Moran’s I	24.700	0.000
LM-error	594.530	0.000
LM-error (robust)	418.578	0.000
LM-lag	211.646	0.000
LM-lag (robust)	35.695	0.000
Hausman	210.31	0.000
LR-SAR	82.79	0.001
LR-SEM	71.86	0.000
WALD-SAR	84.16	0.001
WALD-SEM	72.24	0.007

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Table 3. The measurement results of global Moran’s I of carbon emissions.

Year	Moran’s I	Z-values	P-values
2006	0.3399	8.0640	0.0000
2007	0.3463	8.2140	0.0000
2008	0.3515	8.3358	0.0000
2009	0.3590	8.5172	0.0000
2010	0.3688	8.7409	0.0000
2011	0.3512	8.3283	0.0000
2012	0.3614	8.5695	0.0000
2013	0.3813	9.0340	0.0000
2014	0.3677	8.7199	0.0000
2015	0.4006	9.4917	0.0000
2016	0.4070	9.6420	0.0000
2017	0.3981	9.4308	0.0000
2018	0.3993	9.4606	0.0000
2019	0.3785	8.9718	0.0000

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Figure 2. Scatter plot and fitted line of fiscal decentralization and carbon emissions.

Source: calculated by the authors and plotted using STATA software.

Table 4. Regression results of fiscal decentralization on carbon emissions.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
Variables	OLS	RE	FE	ind	time	ind-time
FD	1.6290***	0.3270***	0.1228*	0.2390***	1.8030***	0.2413***
	(19.23)	(4.83)	(1.78)	(3.45)	(19.10)	(3.49)
Innovation	0.2230***	0.1042***	0.0618***	0.1281***	0.3357***	0.1029***
	(18.60)	(8.12)	(4.69)	(8.98)	(19.02)	(7.09)
Popolation	−1.0303***	−0.8122***	−0.6324***	−0.6014***	−1.0863***	−0.5967***
	(−47.32)	(−14.82)	(−6.91)	(−6.04)	(−42.84)	(−6.06)
Industry	0.1370	0.3113**	0.4516***	0.4756***	0.5132***	0.5931***
	(1.11)	(2.56)	(3.63)	(3.56)	(4.15)	(4.43)
Fdi	0.0065	0.0133**	0.0070	0.0131**	−0.0059	0.0112*
	(0.65)	(2.22)	(1.18)	(2.16)	(−0.61)	(1.85)
Openness	0.0663***	0.0647***	0.0312***	0.0680***	0.1037***	0.0546***
	(6.04)	(6.32)	(2.90)	(6.50)	(9.60)	(5.21)
Greenery	0.2917*	0.1941**	0.1744**	0.1775**	0.3944**	0.1223
	(1.69)	(2.15)	(1.96)	(2.09)	(2.56)	(1.45)
Constants	2.7475***	2.6290***	2.3291***
	(17.24)	(8.07)	(4.33)
$W\times \mathit{\text{FD}}$				−0.2432**	−1.1061***	−0.2160*
				(−2.27)	(−7.62)	(−1.92)
$\rho$				0.1707***	0.4336***	0.1256***
				(8.10)	(25.60)	(5.79)
${\sigma }^2$				0.0751***	0.3791***	0.0734***
				(43.03)	(42.16)	(43.11)
N	3,724	3,724	3,724	3,724	3,724	3,724
$R^2$	0.6021		0.2520	0.5361	0.6247	0.3657

Note: t statistics in parentheses, * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Table 5. Results of the decomposition of the total effect of fiscal decentralization on carbon emissions.

Variables	Direct effect	Indirect effect
	(1)	(2)
FD	0.2383***	−0.2108*
	(3.39)	(−1.76)
Control variables	YES	YES

Note: t statistics in parentheses, * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Table 6. Results of the robustness tests.

Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
L.CO2	0.9240***			0.9615***
	(80.36)			(66.44)
FD	0.0920**	0.2414***	0.2283***	0.0419*
	(1.97)	(3.49)	(3.28)	(1.87)
Innovation	0.0162	0.1027***	0.0918***	0.0067
	(1.63)	(7.08)	(6.35)	(1.15)
Popolation	−0.2521***	0.4031***	−0.6252***	−0.0316*
	(−3.78)	(4.09)	(−6.46)	(−1.95)
Industry	0.1398	0.5930***	0.7001***	−0.0583
	(1.50)	(4.42)	(5.34)	(−1.57)
Fdi	0.0066	0.0112*	0.0106*	−0.0027
	(1.62)	(1.85)	(1.75)	(−0.81)
Openness	0.0147**	0.0546***	0.0468***	−0.0032
	(2.04)	(5.21)	(4.48)	(−0.78)
Greenery	−0.0578	0.1222	0.1653*	0.7087*
	(−0.98)	(1.45)	(1.95)	(1.82)
Constants				−0.0161
				(−0.14)
$\rho$	0.0605***	0.1257***	0.2541**
	(3.49)	(5.80)	(1.96)
${\sigma }^2$	0.0332***	0.0734***	0.0744***
	(44.77)	(43.11)	(43.14)
AR (1)				[0.000]
AR (2)				[0.985]
Sargan test				[0.961]
Hansen test				[0.168]
N	3458	3724	3724	3458
$R^2$	0.9566	0.1698	0.1752

Note: t statistics in parentheses, * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. The p-values are in [].

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.

Figure 3. Regression results of regional heterogeneity.

Source: calculated by the authors and plotted using STATA software.

Figure 4. Regression results of fiscal decentralization on real estate development.

Source: calculated by the authors and plotted using STATA software.

Table 7. Regression results of the moderating effect of UCIB on fiscal decentralization and carbon emissions.

Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
FD	0.3990***	0.2943***	0.3952***	0.2951***
	(5.57)	(4.12)	(5.52)	(4.15)
UCIB	0.0008***	0.0007**
	(2.92)	(2.41)
FD$\times$UCIB	−0.0011***	−0.0007**
	(−3.17)	(−2.03)
Accumulated-UCIB			0.0002***	0.0002**
			(3.05)	(2.57)
FD$\times$Accumulated-UCIB			−0.0003***	−0.0002**
			(−3.26)	(−2.18)
Control variables	NO	YES	NO	YES
N	3724	3724	3724	3724
$R^2$	0.2396	0.3991	0.2408	0.3990

Note: t statistics in parentheses, * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

Source: calculated by the authors using STATA software.