The Threshold Effect of Rationalization of Industrial Structure on Air Quality in Shanxi Province

Meifeng ZHU; Qinglong WU; Huaming ZHANG; Zhanbo CHEN

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2020.02.008

Journals >Journal of Resources and Ecology >Volume 11 >Issue 2 >Page 206 > Article

Journal of Resources and Ecology
Vol. 11, Issue 2, 206 (2020)

The Threshold Effect of Rationalization of Industrial Structure on Air Quality in Shanxi Province

Meifeng ZHU^1、*, Qinglong WU¹, Huaming ZHANG², and Zhanbo CHEN³

Author Affiliations

¹School of Economics and Management, North University of China, Taiyuan 030051, China

²School of Economy, Shanxi University of Finance & Economics, Taiyuan 030006, China;

³Guangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanning 530003, China

show less

DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2020.02.008 Cite this Article

Meifeng ZHU, Qinglong WU, Huaming ZHANG, Zhanbo CHEN. The Threshold Effect of Rationalization of Industrial Structure on Air Quality in Shanxi Province[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2020, 11(2): 206 Copy Citation Text

EndNote(RIS)

BibTex

Plain Text

show less

Year	Linfen	Lvliang	Datong	Taiyuan	Xinzhou	Jinzhong	Jincheng	Shuozhou	Yuncheng	Changzhi	Yangquan
2004	0.212	0.289	0.167	0.068	0.264	0.315	0.168	0.220	0.346	0.314	0.036
2005	0.140	0.137	0.050	0.035	0.087	0.144	0.071	0.170	0.263	0.134	0.007
2006	0.119	0.102	0.048	0.005	0.076	0.112	0.100	0.207	0.189	0.108	0.010
2007	0.132	0.101	0.030	0.007	0.063	0.082	0.092	0.164	0.125	0.085	0.009
2008	0.264	0.243	0.183	0.086	0.217	0.233	0.232	0.225	0.293	0.196	0.034
2009	0.121	0.074	0.014	0.027	0.004	0.100	0.066	0.015	0.122	0.113	0.001
2010	0.099	0.092	0.012	0.017	0.018	0.100	0.067	0.020	0.135	0.024	0.001
2011	0.133	0.113	0.013	0.026	0.035	0.102	0.084	0.029	0.129	0.133	0.005
2012	0.141	0.110	0.019	0.028	0.035	0.114	0.101	0.017	0.072	0.195	0.011
2013	0.187	0.182	0.022	0.077	0.051	0.140	0.108	0.037	0.040	0.210	0.043
2014	0.188	0.155	0.026	0.067	0.064	0.068	0.080	0.036	0.028	0.158	0.035
2015	0.199	0.120	0.037	0.089	0.069	0.059	0.067	0.025	0.021	0.109	0.028
2016	0.204	0.144	0.039	0.131	0.085	0.068	0.058	0.032	0.031	0.102	0.029

Table 1.

The RIS value of 11 provincial cities in Shanxi Province from 2004 to 2016

View in the Article

Variable	Levin, Lin & Chu test	ADF test	PP test	Result
Log(PM2.5)	1.115(0.868)	31.021*(0.096)	32.028*(0.077)	partially stable
Log(SIS)	0.177(0.570)	10.926(0.976)	6.793(0.999)	unstable
Log(RIS)	-5.846***(0.000)	54.754***(0.000)	63.129***(0.000)	stable
Log(ES)	-5.039***(0.000)	22.553(0.191)	46.760***(0.002)	partially stable
Log(PR)	-0.582(0.280)	12.998(0.933)	12.425(0.948)	unstable
Log(PEC)	-3.201***(0.001)	15.001(0.862)	29.269(0.137)	partially stable
Log(PIC)	-2.657***(0.004)	33.833*(0.051)	59.631***(0.000)	stable
Log(PM2.5)	-12.383***(0.000)	141.249***(0.000)	142.305**(0.000)	stable
Log(SIS)	-10.393***(0.000)	76.653***(0.000)	107.207***(0.000)	stable
Log(RIS)	-14.077***(0.000)	114.197***(0.000)	175.535***(0.000)	stable
Log(ES)	-6.445***(0.000)	45.882***(0.002)	15.155***(0.003)	stable
Log(PR)	-26.177***(0.000)	112.683***(0.000)	115.295***(0.000)	stable
Log(PEC)	-8.339***(0.000)	70.591***(0.000)	79.752***(0.000)	stable
Log(PIC)	-33.544***(0.000)	141.090***(0.000)	140.354***(0.000)	stable

Table 2.

The results of stationary test

View in the Article

Threshold effect	Type of threshold test	Null hypothesis	F-statistic	Prob.	Critical value
Threshold effect	Type of threshold test	Null hypothesis	F-statistic	Prob.	1%	5%	10%
RIS	Single threshold	linear regression	8.041***	0.002	5.863	3.589	2.537
RIS	Double threshold	Single threshold	3.242*	0.082	6.671	4.022	2.823
SIS (for RIS)	Single threshold	linear regression	8.152***	0.007	7.614	4.121	2.695
SIS (for RIS)	Double threshold	Single threshold	3.959**	0.037	6.779	3.183	2.023
SE (for RIS)	Single threshold	linear regression	7.751***	0.003	6.409	3.841	3.029
SE (for RIS)	Double threshold	Single threshold	2.916*	0.084	7.732	3.906	2.662
PE (for RIS)	Single threshold	linear regression	5.967**	0.017	6.478	3.714	2.541
PE (for RIS)	Double threshold	Single threshold	9.051***	0.004	7.543	4.296	2.995

Table 3.

The results of the threshold effect test

View in the Article

Threshold variable	Threshold estimates	95% confidence interval
RIS	-0.894	(-2.134,-0.580)
RIS	-0.659	(-0.737,-0.580)
SIS (for RIS)	-0.308	(-0.447,0.258)
SIS (for RIS)	-0.296	(-0.390,-0.214)
ES (for RIS)	1.059	(0.852,1.072)
ES (for RIS)	1.267	(0.779,1.383)
PR (for RIS)	-0.048	(-0.117,-0.038)
PR (for RIS)	-0.227	(-0.247,-0.217)

Table 4.

Test results of threshold estimates

View in the Article

Independen t variable	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4
Independen t variable	Threshold variable-RIS	Threshold variable-SIS	Threshold variable-ES	Threshold variable-PR
SIS	-0.249***(-4.128)	-0.060(-0.789)	-0.188***(-2.962)	-0.258***(-4.313)
ES	0.079(1.577)	0.097*(1.911)	0.252***(3.399)	0.044(0.875)
PR	-0.062(-0.502)	-0.013(-0.102)	-0.044(-0.357)	0.212(1.553)
PEC	-0.077**(-2.064)	-0.111***(-2.956)	-0.097**(-2.594)	-0.085**(-2.271)
PIC	-0.035(-1.111)	-0.003(-0.093)	-0.024(-0.772)	-0.016(-0.513)
RIS_1	-0.039**(-2.418)	-0.119***(-5.366)	-0.086***(-5.438)	-0.159***(-5.5030
RIS_2	-0.007(-0.244)	-0.080***(-5.079)	-0.044***(-2.889)	-0.094***(-5.841)
RIS_3	-0.079*(1.764)	-0.146***(-3.119)	-0.079(-0.834)	-0.154***(-3.671)
R²	0.660	0.453	0.552	0.574
F-stat	42.25***	48.96***	58.62***	39.28***