Ecological compensation for ambient air quality, legal environmental quality, and energy utilization efficiency of new energy enterprises

Authors

  • Qiongyan Cai Southwest Forestry University, Kunming 650051, China
Article ID: 470
154 Views

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18686/cest470

Keywords:

ecological compensation; ambient air quality; legal environmental quality; energy utilization efficiency; new energy enterprises

Abstract

This study examines whether—and through which channels—China’s ambient air quality ecological compensation (AQEC) policy improves the energy utilization efficiency of new energy enterprises. The AQEC, piloted in selected provinces in the mid-2010s and later expanded nationwide, links intergovernmental fiscal transfers to measurable improvements in regional air quality, creating explicit incentives for local governments and regulated firms. We compile a firm-level panel dataset of 10,461 observations from 2003 to 2022, covering listed enterprises engaged in renewable power generation, energy‐efficient equipment manufacturing, and other strategic emerging industries. Using a difference-in-differences (DID) design, we find that AQEC significantly raises energy efficiency, with stronger effects for smaller firms and firms in less competitive industries. Beyond numerical gains, the results suggest that AQEC encourages firms to invest in cleaner production processes, adopt energy‐saving technologies, and strengthen environmental management systems. Mechanism analysis reveals that these improvements operate partly through enhancements in the legal environmental quality, reflecting stronger regulatory enforcement, greater transparency, and more predictable institutional support. Robustness checks—including PSM-DID, placebo testing, and entropy balancing—reinforce the credibility of our findings. By combining quantitative evidence with qualitative context on policy design, sectoral characteristics, and institutional change, this study advances understanding of how ecological compensation can promote sustainability and corporate performance in the new energy sector.

Downloads

Published

2025-10-28

How to Cite

Cai, Q. (2025). Ecological compensation for ambient air quality, legal environmental quality, and energy utilization efficiency of new energy enterprises. Clean Energy Science and Technology, 3(4), 470. https://doi.org/10.18686/cest470

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 4 (2025)

Section

Article

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Author

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

1. Cui L, Duan H, Mo J, Song M. Ecological compensation in air pollution governance: China’s efforts, challenges, and potential solutions. International Review of Financial Analysis. 2021; 74(C): 101701. doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101701 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101701

2. Song J, Liang Z, Guo Q, Wang C. Current situation, dilemmas and measures to improve horizontal ecological compensation coordination mechanisms in river basins. Sustainability. 2023; 15(2): 1504. doi: 10.3390/su15021504 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021504

3. Xiao W, Qu L, Li K, et al. An assessment of the rational range of eco-compensation standards: A case study in the Nujiang Prefecture, Southwestern China. Land. 2022; 11(9): 1417. doi: 10.3390/land11091417 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091417

4. Song M, Zheng H, Shen Z. Whether the carbon emissions trading system improves energy efficiency–Empirical testing based on China’s provincial panel data. Energy. 2023; 275: 127465. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.127465 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.127465

5. Qi J, Song Y, Zhang Y. Environmental Protection Tax and Energy Efficiency: Evidence from Chinese City-Level Data. Energies. 2023; 16(24): 8104. doi: 10.3390/en16248104 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en16248104

6. Tang K, Zhang K. The effects of low-carbon governance on energy-environmental efficiency: Evidence from China’s low-carbon city pilot policy. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade. 2024; 60(6): 1227-1245. doi: 10.1080/1540496X.2023.2267735 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2023.2267735

7. Gan Z, Zong J. Can ecological compensation improve urban air quality?. China Population Resources & Environment. 2021; 31(10).

8. Weng S, Tao W, Cui L. Can ecological compensation reduce air pollution? New evidence from resource-based cities in China. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy. 2024; 19(1): 2351803. doi: 10.1080/15567249.2024.2351803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2024.2351803

9. Zhang X, Wu L, Zhang Z. Does Air Quality Ecological Compensation Improve Total Factor Energy Efficiency?—A Quasi-Natural Experiment from 282 Cities in China. Sustainability. 2024; 16(14): 6067. doi: 10.3390/su16146067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16146067

10. Sun H, Edziah BK, Kporsu AK, et al. Energy efficiency: The role of technological innovation and knowledge spillover. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2021; 167(C): 120659. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120659 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120659

11. Wang L, Ma Y. Technological innovation, resource endowment, and green total factor energy efficiency. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022; 29(52): 79618-79633. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-21426-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21426-0

12. Mitsuhashi H, Nakamura A. Pay and networks in organizations: Incentive redesign as a driver of network change. Strategic Management Journal. 2021; 43(2): 295-322. doi: 10.1002/smj.3335 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3335

13. Wen H, Lee CC, Zhou F. How does fiscal policy uncertainty affect corporate innovation investment? Evidence from China’s new energy industry. Energy Economics. 2022; 105(C): 105767. doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105767 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105767

14. Mbalyohere C, Lawton TC. Engaging informal institutions through corporate political activity: Capabilities for subnational embeddedness in emerging economies. International Business Review. 2022; 31(2): 101927. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101927 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101927

15. Sun P, Doh JP, Rajwani T, Siegel D. Navigating cross-border institutional complexity: A review and assessment of multinational nonmarket strategy research. Journal of International Business Studies. 2021; 52(9): 1818-1853. doi: 10.1057/s41267-021-00438-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00438-x

16. Shi M, Zhang DY, Zou PJ, BECIdstock D. Scale Effect and Innovation Effect of New Energy Enterprises’ Value-added Tax Incentives. The Journal of Quantitative & Technical Economics. 2016; 04: 60-77.

17. Ye X, Rasoulinezhad E. Assessment of impacts of green bonds on renewable energy utilization efficiency. Renewable Energy. 2023; 202: 626-633. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2022.11.124 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.11.124

18. Fan G, Wang XL, Zhang LW, et al. Report on the relative progress of marketization in various regions of China. Economic Research Journal. 3: 9-89.

19. Ruan R, Chen W. Research on the impact of geographic distance on corporate technology for social good: From the perspective of institutional environment and regional innovation capability. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2024; 457: 142391. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142391 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142391

20. Naveed A, Shabbir G. Effect of formal and informal institutional indicators on innovation activities: An empirical analysis for a global sample. Social Indicators Research. 2022; 164(2): 665-691. doi: 10.1007/s11205-022-02975-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-022-02975-w

21. Ning Y, Shen B. Environmental regulations, finance, and firm environmental investments: an empirical exploration. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2024; 35(7-8): 713-738. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2024.2329691 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2024.2329691