Comparative study on carbon emission spatial network and carbon emission reduction collaboration in urban agglomerations

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Yongqiang Dong , Lanjian Liu
{"title":"Comparative study on carbon emission spatial network and carbon emission reduction collaboration in urban agglomerations","authors":"Yongqiang Dong ,&nbsp;Lanjian Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Collaborative carbon reduction in urban agglomerations is imperative under China’s regional integration development strategy and dual-carbon goals. However, whether existing collaborative requirements align with the spatially networked reality of carbon emissions and deliver expected effects remains unclear, hindering deeper coordination. This study evaluates the status of carbon reduction collaboration in the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration through collaborative quantity and intensity dimensions. Social network analysis reveals the carbon emission spatial network structure, while a collaborative quantity/centrality versus intensity/centrality scatter plot assesses their alignment. QAP analysis tests collaborative efficacy. It finds that collaboration exhibits a core-periphery structure dominated by central cities, driven by inspections, framework agreements, and cooperation agreements, with peripheral cities compensating low participation through intensity-driven catch-up effects. The carbon emission network displays pronounced core-periphery characteristics with growing complexity, where core cities control regional emission flows while peripheral cities show limited influence, forming distinct net spillovers and agents. Mismatches exist between collaboration patterns and emission networks: central cities dominate cooperation, while peripheral cities lack initiative; intensity polarization and provincial-level mini-clubs prevail. Collaboration exerts no significant impact on emission network formation due to entrenched core-periphery power hierarchies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"174 ","pages":"Article 113487"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25004170","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collaborative carbon reduction in urban agglomerations is imperative under China’s regional integration development strategy and dual-carbon goals. However, whether existing collaborative requirements align with the spatially networked reality of carbon emissions and deliver expected effects remains unclear, hindering deeper coordination. This study evaluates the status of carbon reduction collaboration in the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration through collaborative quantity and intensity dimensions. Social network analysis reveals the carbon emission spatial network structure, while a collaborative quantity/centrality versus intensity/centrality scatter plot assesses their alignment. QAP analysis tests collaborative efficacy. It finds that collaboration exhibits a core-periphery structure dominated by central cities, driven by inspections, framework agreements, and cooperation agreements, with peripheral cities compensating low participation through intensity-driven catch-up effects. The carbon emission network displays pronounced core-periphery characteristics with growing complexity, where core cities control regional emission flows while peripheral cities show limited influence, forming distinct net spillovers and agents. Mismatches exist between collaboration patterns and emission networks: central cities dominate cooperation, while peripheral cities lack initiative; intensity polarization and provincial-level mini-clubs prevail. Collaboration exerts no significant impact on emission network formation due to entrenched core-periphery power hierarchies.
城市群碳排放空间网络与碳减排协同比较研究
城市群协同减碳是中国区域一体化发展战略和双碳目标的必然要求。然而,现有的合作要求是否与碳排放的空间网络现实相一致并产生预期效果仍不清楚,这阻碍了更深层次的协调。本文从协同量和协同强度两个维度对长三角城市群碳减排协同现状进行了评价。社会网络分析揭示了碳排放的空间网络结构,而协同数量/中心性与强度/中心性散点图评估了它们的一致性。QAP分析测试协作效能。研究发现,合作呈现出以中心城市为主导,由考察、框架协议和合作协议驱动的核心-外围结构,外围城市通过强度驱动的追赶效应弥补低参与度。碳排放网络呈现出明显的核心-边缘特征,且复杂性日益增强,核心城市控制区域排放流,边缘城市影响有限,形成了不同的净溢出效应和动因。合作模式与排放网络不匹配:中心城市主导合作,外围城市缺乏主动性;强度两极分化和省级迷你俱乐部盛行。协作对排放网络的形成没有显著影响,因为核心-边缘权力等级已经确立。
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
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
×
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