Which works better? Comparing the environmental outcomes of different forms of intergovernmental collaboration in China's air pollution control

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Shaowei Chen, Xinfeng Zhao, Lingyi Zhou
{"title":"Which works better? Comparing the environmental outcomes of different forms of intergovernmental collaboration in China's air pollution control","authors":"Shaowei Chen, Xinfeng Zhao, Lingyi Zhou","doi":"10.1080/1523908X.2021.2000379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT While collaborative governance has been widely applied to address environmental problems, little is known about the environmental outcomes of collaborations. Drawing on the institutional collective action (ICA) framework, this study constructs a framework that links different forms of collaboration, defined by different levels of central intervention, to environmental outcomes. We argue that the outcome of a particular form of collaboration is a function of its effectiveness and the level of complexity the collaboration faces. When the effectiveness of a collaboration form matches the complexity faced by the collaboration, it is more likely to achieve better environmental outcomes. Using city-level air quality data and the weighted fixed effect difference-in-difference approach, we find results that strongly support our arguments. This research contributes to the understanding of the environmental outcomes of collaborations and provides practical insights for public managers to design intergovernmental collaborations.","PeriodicalId":15699,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","volume":"40 1","pages":"16 - 28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2021.2000379","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT While collaborative governance has been widely applied to address environmental problems, little is known about the environmental outcomes of collaborations. Drawing on the institutional collective action (ICA) framework, this study constructs a framework that links different forms of collaboration, defined by different levels of central intervention, to environmental outcomes. We argue that the outcome of a particular form of collaboration is a function of its effectiveness and the level of complexity the collaboration faces. When the effectiveness of a collaboration form matches the complexity faced by the collaboration, it is more likely to achieve better environmental outcomes. Using city-level air quality data and the weighted fixed effect difference-in-difference approach, we find results that strongly support our arguments. This research contributes to the understanding of the environmental outcomes of collaborations and provides practical insights for public managers to design intergovernmental collaborations.
哪种效果更好?比较中国大气污染治理中不同形式政府间合作的环境效果
虽然协作治理已被广泛应用于解决环境问题,但人们对协作的环境结果知之甚少。利用制度集体行动(ICA)框架,本研究构建了一个框架,将不同形式的合作(由不同水平的中央干预所定义)与环境结果联系起来。我们认为,特定形式的协作的结果是其有效性和协作所面临的复杂程度的函数。当协作形式的有效性与协作所面临的复杂性相匹配时,它更有可能实现更好的环境结果。使用城市一级的空气质量数据和加权固定效应差分法,我们发现结果有力地支持了我们的论点。本研究有助于理解合作的环境结果,并为公共管理者设计政府间合作提供了实践见解。
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
7.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
46
×
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