Next Article in Journal
Examining the Associations between Walk Score, Perceived Built Environment, and Physical Activity Behaviors among Women Participating in a Community-Randomized Lifestyle Change Intervention Trial: Strong Hearts, Healthy Communities
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatiotemporal Pattern of Fine Particulate Matter and Impact of Urban Socioeconomic Factors in China
Previous Article in Journal
Vitamin D and Public Health
Previous Article in Special Issue
Strategically Patrolling in a Chemical Cluster Addressing Gas Pollutants’ Releases through a Game-Theoretic Model
Article Menu
Issue 5 (March-1) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Does the “Miracle Drug” of Environmental Governance Really Improve Air Quality? Evidence from China’s System of Central Environmental Protection Inspections

School of Public Administration, Central South University, 932 Lushan South Road, Changsha 410083, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(5), 850; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16050850
Received: 27 December 2018 / Revised: 27 February 2019 / Accepted: 5 March 2019 / Published: 8 March 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Air Quality Monitoring and Assessment)
  |  
PDF [5762 KB, uploaded 8 March 2019]
  |  

Abstract

Central environmental protection inspections have completed their goal of full coverage of 31 provinces in China, and more than 17,000 officials have been held accountable. The media has evaluated the effectiveness of central environmental protection inspections using the notions of “instant results” and the “miracle drug of environmental governance.” Can this approach effectively promote local environmental governance? This paper takes the treatment effect of central environmental protection inspections on air pollution as an example. Using the method of regression discontinuity, central environmental protection inspections are found to have a positive effect on the air quality index (AQI), but this effect is only short term and unsustainable. Additionally, there are inter-provincial differences. Judging from the research results on sub-contaminants, the treatment effect of central environmental protection inspections on air pollution is mainly reflected in PM10, PM2.5 and CO. Under the current situation in which PM10 and PM2.5 are the main assessment indexes, this phenomenon indicates that due to the political achievements and promotion of local officials and for reasons of accountability, it is more effective for the central government to conduct specific environmental assessments through local governments than to conduct central environmental protection inspections. View Full-Text
Keywords: central environmental protection inspections; air quality; campaign-style governance central environmental protection inspections; air quality; campaign-style governance
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Wu, R.; Hu, P. Does the “Miracle Drug” of Environmental Governance Really Improve Air Quality? Evidence from China’s System of Central Environmental Protection Inspections. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 850.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top