2013年-世界发展银行全球_Factors_Influencing_Energy____________Intensity_in_Four_Chinese_Industries_44页_1mb

Summary of "Factors Influencing Energy Intensity in Four Chinese Industries"

Core Content

This paper investigates the factors contributing to the decline in energy intensity in four key Chinese industries: Pulp and Paper, Cement, Iron and Steel, and Aluminum. It uses firm-level data from 1999 to 2004, focusing on the most energy-intensive large and medium-sized enterprises in each industry. The study aims to understand the role of industrial policies, market reforms, energy pricing, technology development, foreign investment, and regional differences in reducing energy intensity at the firm level.

Main Findings

• Energy prices have been a significant contributor to the decline in energy intensity across all four industries.
• Scale economies, encouraged by policies such as "grasping the large, letting go of the small," have also played an important role in reducing energy intensity.
• Technology development has contributed to energy intensity decline in some industries, particularly in Cement.
• Trade openness and foreign direct investment (FDI) have had a limited effect, influencing only one or two of the four industries.
• Regional differences have been observed: firms in the North and East tend to have lower energy intensity than those in the South or Southwest.
• Ownership type also affects energy intensity, with non-state-owned enterprises (non-SOEs) showing greater reductions in response to higher energy prices compared to state-owned enterprises (SOEs).

Key Factors and Their Impact

Policy and Market Reforms

• The "grasping the large, letting go of the small" policy was a major driver of energy intensity decline by promoting consolidation and closure of inefficient small enterprises.
• Energy-saving programs and liberalization of domestic markets have also contributed to the decline in energy intensity.
• Energy intensity standards were introduced to force inefficient firms to either improve their energy efficiency or close.
• Market reforms started in the 1980s and 1990s, including the elimination of state-controlled pricing and the introduction of tiered pricing systems, have played a key role in increasing energy prices and thus reducing energy intensity.

Methodology

• The study combines three firm-level data sets from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS):
  • Economic and financial data
  • Science and technology (S&T) data
  • Energy data
• A balanced dataset of 2,000 firms per year from 1995 to 2004 was created, resulting in 20,000 observations.
• The technology development stock was constructed using a formula that accounts for depreciation and annual growth rate of R&D expenditures.

Industry-Specific Observations

• Pulp and Paper: Firms in the North and East have lower energy intensity than those in the South.
• Cement: Firms in the North, East, and South have lower energy intensity than those in the Southwest.
• Iron and Steel: Firms in the South and Southwest have lower energy intensity than those in the North and East.
• Aluminum: Energy intensity decline is less pronounced, with a 24.1% reduction in energy consumption per unit of output from 2001 to 2006.

Research Hypotheses

The paper tests the following hypotheses:

• H1: Rising energy prices will have a negative and significant effect on energy intensity.
• H2: Increasing trade openness (especially after WTO accession in 2001) will be an important factor in firm-level energy intensity differences.
• H3: Technology development (process and product innovation) will significantly reduce energy intensity in industries like Cement.
• H4: There is a negative relationship between energy price and technology development, leading to lower energy intensity.
• H5: FDI will lead to lower energy intensity due to the introduction of advanced technologies and management practices.
• H6: Firms with higher technology development activity will utilize FDI more efficiently, leading to lower energy intensity.
• H7: Foreign-owned enterprises will have lower energy intensity than other ownership types.
• H8: The "grasping the large, letting go of the small" policy will lead to lower energy intensity due to scale economies.
• H9: Firms in more developed regions (North and East) will have lower energy intensity than those in less developed regions.

Conclusion

The study concludes that while energy prices and scale economies are key factors in reducing energy intensity across all four industries, technology development, trade openness, and foreign influence have only limited effects, primarily in Cement. Regional and ownership differences also play a role in shaping energy intensity levels, with non-state-owned firms and those in developed regions showing better performance. The findings highlight the importance of market-oriented reforms and policy interventions in driving energy efficiency improvements in Chinese industries.