Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Oct 28;15(10):e0240723.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240723. eCollection 2020.

Does environmental regulation reduce China's haze pollution? An empirical analysis based on panel quantile regression

Congxin Li  1 , Guozhu Li  1
Affiliations

Does environmental regulation reduce China's haze pollution? An empirical analysis based on panel quantile regression

Congxin Li et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Haze pollution in China is very serious and has become the source of mortality, affecting the health and lives of residents. The Chinese government adopts different policy measures to reduce haze pollution. The impact of different types of environmental regulations on haze pollution has become a hot topic for academics and government departments. Based on panel data from 2005-2017, this paper studies the effect of different types of environmental regulations on haze pollution in 30 provinces of China using a panel quantile model. The results show that when haze pollution changes from a low quantile to a high quantile, the marginal impact of command-and-control environmental regulation on haze pollution changes from 0.122 to -0.332. Command-and-control environmental regulation can reduce haze pollution, but its impact is not significant. The main reason for this finding is that environmental law enforcement is not strict. The marginal impact of economically restrained environmental regulation on haze pollution changes from -14.389 to 49.939. Economically restrained environmental regulation can reduce haze pollution in low quantiles, but not in high quantiles. The collection of sewage charges fees is far less than the total profit, which has no deterrent effect on enterprises. The marginal impact of public participation in environmental regulation on haze pollution changes from 0.154 to -0.002. Public participation in environmental regulation cannot reduce haze pollution in low quantiles, but can in high quantiles; however its impact becomes insignificant. This study reveals the quantile-based discrepancy in the effect of environmental regulation on haze pollution, and offers a new perspective for research on the effects of environmental regulation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in this paper.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Box plot of haze pollution status in 30 provinces of China from 2005 to 2017.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Variation in the panel quantile regression coefficients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cao CH, Han LY. The Assessment on the Social Health Costs Caused by Fog and Haze. Statistical Research.2015;32(7):19–23.
    1. Peng J, Guo SY, Pei YN, Zhang S. Mainland Chinese residents’perception of tourism impacted by haze in Beijing and their attitudes. China Population, Resources and Environment. 2016;26(10):168–176.
    1. Sun JK, Zhang JH, Wang C, Duan XF. Escape or stay? Effects of haze pollution on domestic travel: Comparative analysis of different regions in China. Science of The Total Environment.2019; 690:151–157. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.415 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Xu XW, Tong DX, Wang YL, Wang SY. The Impacts of Different Air Pollutants on Domestic and Inbound Tourism in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019;16:5127, 1–15. 10.3390/ijerph16245127 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Korhonen J, Pätäri S, Toppinen A, Tuppura A. The role of environmental regulation in the future competitiveness of the pulp and paper industry: the case of the sulfur emissions directive in Northern Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production.2015;108:864–872. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.003 - DOI

Publication types