Center for Quantitative Economics, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China.
School of Business and Management, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 14;19(8):4767. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19084767.
Existing studies have examined the double dividend effect of environmental protection tax. However, less attention has been paid to the influencing factors and transmission paths of the pollution abatement effect of the environmental protection tax. Based on the panel data for 30 of China's provinces from 2007 to 2019, this study discusses the environmental protection tax's influencing factors and transmission paths on the emission scale and intensity of different air pollutants through the panel threshold regression model and mediating effect model. The results show that: (1) the environmental protection tax has a positive emission reduction effect on the emission scale or emission intensity of sulfur dioxide (SO) and nitrogen oxides (NO); (2) the abatement effect is stronger when per capita gross regional product is above the threshold value; (3) technological progress, economic growth, and industrial structure all have positive mediating effects. Therefore, the local environmental protection tax rate should be set with comprehensive consideration of regional economic development, industrial structure, and technological progress.
已有研究考察了环境保护税的双重红利效应。然而，对于环境保护税的减排效应的影响因素和传递路径，关注较少。基于 2007 年至 2019 年中国 30 个省份的面板数据，本研究通过面板门槛回归模型和中介效应模型，探讨了环境保护税对不同空气污染物排放规模和强度的影响因素和传递路径。结果表明：（1）环境保护税对二氧化硫（SO）和氮氧化物（NO）的排放规模或排放强度具有正向减排效应；（2）在人均地区生产总值超过门槛值时，减排效果更强；（3）技术进步、经济增长和产业结构均具有正向中介效应。因此，在设定地方环境保护税率时，应综合考虑区域经济发展、产业结构和技术进步等因素。
