Fanli Business School, Nanyang Institute of Technology, Nanyang 473000, China.
Institute of Central China Development, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 1;19(3):1679. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19031679.
Technical change essentially drives regional social and economic development, and how technical change influences the regional sustainable development of the ecological environment is also of concern. However, technical change is not always neutral, so how does directed technical change affect urban carbon intensity? Is there a spatial spillover effect between these two? In order to answer these above questions, this article first explores the relationship between directed technical change and carbon intensity through the spatial Durbin model; then, it separately analyses whether the relationship between the two in low-carbon and non-low-carbon cities will differ; finally, we performed a robustness test by replacing weights, replacing the explained variable with a lag of one period, and replacing the explained variable. The conclusions are as follows: (1) There is a positive spatial correlation between the carbon intensity of Chinese cities-that is, there is a positive interaction between the carbon intensity of local cities and of neighboring cities. For every 1% change in the carbon intensity of neighboring cities, the carbon intensity of local cities changes by 0.1027% in the same direction. (2) The directed technical change has a significant inhibitory effect on urban carbon intensity, whether in local cities or neighboring cities. However, it is worth mentioning that the direct negative effect is greater in local cities than in neighboring cities. (3) The directed technical change in low-carbon cities has a stronger inhibitory effect on carbon intensity, with a direct effect coefficient of -0.5346 and an indirect effect coefficient of -0.2616. Due to less green policy support in non-low-carbon cities, the inhibitory effect of directed technical change on carbon intensity is weakened; even if the direct effects and indirect effects are superimposed, it is only -0.0510 rather than -0.7962 for low-carbon cities.
技术变革本质上驱动着区域社会经济发展，技术变革如何影响生态环境的区域可持续发展也备受关注。然而，技术变革并非总是中性的，那么有导向的技术变革如何影响城市碳强度呢？这两者之间是否存在空间溢出效应？为了回答这些问题，本文首先通过空间杜宾模型探讨了有导向的技术变革与碳强度之间的关系；然后，分别分析了低碳和非低碳城市之间两者关系是否存在差异；最后，通过更换权重、用滞后一期的解释变量替换被解释变量、用替换被解释变量的方式进行稳健性检验。结论如下：（1）中国城市的碳强度存在正向空间相关性，即本地城市和邻近城市的碳强度之间存在正向相互作用。邻近城市的碳强度每变化 1%，本地城市的碳强度同向变化 0.1027%。（2）有导向的技术变革对城市碳强度具有显著的抑制作用，无论是在本地城市还是在邻近城市。但值得一提的是，本地城市的直接负向效应大于邻近城市。（3）低碳城市的有导向技术变革对碳强度具有更强的抑制作用，直接效应系数为-0.5346，间接效应系数为-0.2616。由于非低碳城市的绿色政策支持较少，有导向的技术变革对碳强度的抑制作用减弱；即使将直接效应和间接效应叠加，也仅为-0.0510，而非低碳城市的-0.7962。
