Does innovative city pilot policy promote urban green growth in China?An analysis of green total factor productivity,2005-2020

The innovative city pilot policy(ICPP)is an essential manifestation of China’s construction of an innovative and green-driven development country.We incorporated urban green total factor productivity(GTFP)growth into the evaluation of ICPP.Based on the panel data of 223 cities in China from 2005 to 2020,we used the difference-in-differences model to empirically assess the influence and mechanism of the ICPP on urban GTFP growth.The main results show that(i)The ICPP has maintained an effectively fluctuating promotion on urban GTFP growth,mainly manifested in the urban green technological progress improvement.(ii)The ICPP has urban heterogeneity in promoting GTFP growth in pilot cities,mainly affecting key cities such as provincial capitals.(iii)The interaction between the agglomeration of producer services and the ICPP inhibits GTFP growth in pilot cities.

Can the low-carbon city pilot policy promote the upgrading of high-carbon emitting enterprises? Evidence from China

As a crucial environmental reform system to realize“carbon peaking”and“carbon neutrality”,the pilot policy of low-carbon cities(LCCs)puts pressure and challenges on high-carbon emitting enterprises(HCEEs)while providing opportunities for these firms to take the path of independent transformation.Employing the data of Chinese listed enterprises from 2006 to 2016 and adopting a difference-in-differences(DID)model,we evaluated the impact of LCC construction on the upgrading of HCEEs and its mechanisms.The results indicate that LCC construction enhances the upgrading of HCEEs in the pilot cities.The conclusions remain stable after a series of robustness tests.The mechanism analysis reveals that LCC construction triggers the upgrading of HCEEs by promoting resource allocation efficiency,R&D investment,and green technology innovation.The heterogeneity results indicate that this positive effect is more pronounced for HCEEs in regions with more stringent environmental law enforcement.This study also observes that the upgrading impact is more promi‐nent for state-owned enterprises,enterprises with higher bargaining power,and enterprises whose managers have a long-term vision.The above results provide directions for upgrading HCEEs and replicable evidence for cities in developing economies to fulfill the win-win target of environmental protection and economic transfor‐mation.

Smart City Development in China: One City One Policy

China is in a process of urbanization and is aiming at a type of people-centered urbanization. The main purpose of developing a ＂smart city＂ is to help this type urbanization and to serve the people of the city. From 2012 to 2015, China has chosen more than 300 cities or towns to be national pilot ＂smart cities.＂ These pilot smart cities are located in more than 30 provinces around China, which differ greatly in thousands ways. So we advocated ＂One City One Policy＂. In 2012, MOHURD announced 90 cities as first batch of pilot smart cities. After three years, some pilot cities achieved great progress. This paper introduces five example cities （including town, district） as five different models of China＇ s smart city development. They are- Guilin city; Yunlong demonstration zone; Panyu District; Yangling Agricultural Hi-tech Industries Demonstration Zone; Lecong town. This paper also introduces our standardization work on smart city field at present.

Multi-Plan Integration: A Pilot Study of Mianzhu, Sichuan Province

The current planning system in China lacks coordination, which is a crucial issue to be explored to fully implement the multi-plan integration. Mianzhu is an example that is officially named as one of the pilot cities for multi-plan integration on the county level. The paper firstly analyzes the problems associated with multi-plan integration in Mianzhu, including the indeterminate hierarchy of the planning system, the disunity of technical standards, problems regarding spatial order, coordination and division of powers and functions, and the intensive utilization of spatial resources, the lack of a coordination mechanism, and low participation of experts and the public. Secondly, by learning from Germany's spatial planning, and also practical experiences of pilot cities for multi-plan integration in China, this paper creatively brings in the connotation of multi-plan integration on the county level, and further proposes a power division based on three-level planning system and three kinds of space, the reinforcement of a spatial order, intensive spatial utilization, and a planning coordination mechanism, hoping to provide reference to other cities.

MOHURD: 10 Cities as the First Group of Pilot Cities for Historic Building Protection

In order to fully practice the spirit of the 19th CPC National Congress,enhance the protection and inheritance of cultural heritage,and fully exert the utilization value of historic building,the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development(MOHURD)recently released the list of the first group of pilot cities for historic building protection,which include:Beijing,Guangzhou,Suzhou,Yangzhou,

An integrated approach to evaluating the coupling coordination degree between low-carbon development and air quality in Chinese cities

Collaborative governance between ecological environment and climate change is a novel signature in China's policy agenda. However, such coordination remains understudied, especially at the local level. Using the principal component analysis, entropy evaluation methods, and the Coupling Coordination Degree Model (CCDM), we evaluated the level of coordination between carbon and air quality mitigation from 34 low-carbon pilot cities in China. We also illustrated the mechanism and policy formation that leads to different coupling patterns at the local level using three case studies. We found that most pilot cities perform a medium level of coupling coordination between low carbon development and air quality. The result reveals that most low-carbon pilot cities score relatively well in low-carbon development. Further, there is a significant cleavage in air quality between cities in the North and those in the South, indicating pilot cities in the South coordinate better than those in the North. In particular, pilot programs in the Southwest and Southeast coastal region perform well in collaborative governance, while the Beijing−Tianjin−Hebei region is rated poorly because of the gap between air quality and low carbon development. Also, we found that the same low-carbon policy might have heterogeneous effects on different air pollutants and across different regions. The local government should adopt low-carbon development policies that address local level specific environmental and economic conditions to maximize their air pollution mitigation benefits.