Can China's renewable energy policy synergies help clean energy transition?

IF 9.8 1区 社会学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Bo Wang , Guangchuan Liu , Silin Zhou , Zishan Tang , Zuyao Liu , Nana Deng , Zhaohua Wang
{"title":"Can China's renewable energy policy synergies help clean energy transition?","authors":"Bo Wang ,&nbsp;Guangchuan Liu ,&nbsp;Silin Zhou ,&nbsp;Zishan Tang ,&nbsp;Zuyao Liu ,&nbsp;Nana Deng ,&nbsp;Zhaohua Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.eiar.2025.107878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Energy transition as a key strategy for achieving climate goals is garnering global attention, with nations actively employing renewable energy (RE) policy instruments to facilitate this shift. Despite extensive research on individual policy impacts, the synergistic or trade-off effects of multiple policies on energy transition require further exploration, especially in countries with market conditions similar to China. This study introduces a provincial energy transition index (ETI) and employs text and association rule mining to discern the policy intensity and key synergies of China's typical RE policies (including feed-in tariff (FIT), carbon emission trading (CET), tradable green certificates (TGC), electricity market (EM) reform, and renewable portfolio standard (RPS)). Based on provincial panel data from 2006 to 2022 in China, their effectiveness is evaluated using a difference-in-differences (DID) estimation. Empirical results indicate that: (1) the national ETI increased by 10.3 % during the study period, with significant regional disparities. (2) three key policy synergies—EM-TGC, FIT-EM-TGC, and RPS-EM-TGC—were identified, with their temporal evolution reflecting a shift in China's energy transition policies from administrative to market-oriented mechanisms. (3) synergy analysis reveals that the EM-TGC synergy is more effective than the standalone TGC policy, and the coordination of FIT further enhances the EM-TGC synergy in current stage of energy transition. Compared to other policy combinations, the RPS-EM-TGC combination is more effective, promoting synergistic development in new energy generation, grid integration, and market absorption. Beyond the China context, this analysis contributes to policy discourse on advancing energy transition in regulated markets.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":309,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Impact Assessment Review","volume":"113 ","pages":"Article 107878"},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Impact Assessment Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925525000757","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Energy transition as a key strategy for achieving climate goals is garnering global attention, with nations actively employing renewable energy (RE) policy instruments to facilitate this shift. Despite extensive research on individual policy impacts, the synergistic or trade-off effects of multiple policies on energy transition require further exploration, especially in countries with market conditions similar to China. This study introduces a provincial energy transition index (ETI) and employs text and association rule mining to discern the policy intensity and key synergies of China's typical RE policies (including feed-in tariff (FIT), carbon emission trading (CET), tradable green certificates (TGC), electricity market (EM) reform, and renewable portfolio standard (RPS)). Based on provincial panel data from 2006 to 2022 in China, their effectiveness is evaluated using a difference-in-differences (DID) estimation. Empirical results indicate that: (1) the national ETI increased by 10.3 % during the study period, with significant regional disparities. (2) three key policy synergies—EM-TGC, FIT-EM-TGC, and RPS-EM-TGC—were identified, with their temporal evolution reflecting a shift in China's energy transition policies from administrative to market-oriented mechanisms. (3) synergy analysis reveals that the EM-TGC synergy is more effective than the standalone TGC policy, and the coordination of FIT further enhances the EM-TGC synergy in current stage of energy transition. Compared to other policy combinations, the RPS-EM-TGC combination is more effective, promoting synergistic development in new energy generation, grid integration, and market absorption. Beyond the China context, this analysis contributes to policy discourse on advancing energy transition in regulated markets.
中国可再生能源政策的协同效应能否帮助清洁能源转型?
能源转型作为实现气候目标的关键战略正受到全球关注,各国积极采用可再生能源政策工具来促进这一转变。尽管对单个政策的影响进行了广泛的研究,但多种政策对能源转型的协同效应或权衡效应需要进一步探索,特别是在与中国市场条件相似的国家。本研究引入省级能源转型指数(ETI),并采用文本和关联规则挖掘来识别中国典型可再生能源政策(包括上网电价(FIT)、碳排放交易(CET)、可交易绿色证书(TGC)、电力市场(EM)改革和可再生能源投资组合标准(RPS))的政策强度和关键协同效应。基于2006年至2022年的中国省级面板数据,采用差分中差分(DID)估计对其有效性进行了评估。实证结果表明:(1)研究期间,全国ETI增长10.3%,区域差异显著;(2)确定了em - tgc、FIT-EM-TGC和rps - em - tgc三个关键政策协同效应,它们的时间演化反映了中国能源转型政策从行政机制向市场机制的转变。(3)协同分析表明,EM-TGC协同比单独的TGC政策更有效,FIT的协同进一步增强了当前能源转型阶段EM-TGC的协同效应。与其他政策组合相比,RPS-EM-TGC组合更加有效,促进了新能源发电、并网和市场吸收的协同发展。在中国背景之外,这一分析有助于推动受监管市场能源转型的政策论述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
10.10%
发文量
200
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Impact Assessment Review is an interdisciplinary journal that serves a global audience of practitioners, policymakers, and academics involved in assessing the environmental impact of policies, projects, processes, and products. The journal focuses on innovative theory and practice in environmental impact assessment (EIA). Papers are expected to present innovative ideas, be topical, and coherent. The journal emphasizes concepts, methods, techniques, approaches, and systems related to EIA theory and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信