Audit Evaluation and Driving Force Analysis of Marine Economic Development Quality
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Data and Methods
2.1. Data Sources
2.2. Index System and Standardization
2.3. Methods
2.3.1. Principal Component Analysis
2.3.2. Coupling Coordination Degree Model
2.3.3. Data Envelopment Analysis Model
3. Results and Analysis
3.1. The Driving Force of Marine Economic Development
3.2. Comprehensive Score of Principal Components of Marine Economic Development Quality
3.3. The Coupling Coordination Degree
3.4. Malmquist Index
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions and Policy Recommendation
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhao, H.L. The Key of High Quality Development: Innovation Driven, Green Development and People’s Welfare. Chin. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 10, 5–9. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, J.T. Study on Transformation of China’s Marine Development Direction and Policy in the Thirteenth Five-Year Planning Period. Ecol. Econ. 2016, 32, 21–24. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Mlachila, M.; Tapsoba, R.; Tapsoba, S. A Quality of Growth Index for Developing Countries: A Proposal; Springer: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume 134, pp. 675–710. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, Y.; Tsydypova, A.; Zhang, Y. Evaluation of Marine Economic Efficiency of China’s Coastal Provinces Based on DEA Model. J. Coast. Res. 2020, 112, 315–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, X.; Di, Q.B.; Ji, J.W. Measurement on the Level of the Urban Ecological Performance and Analysis of Influential Factors in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration. Econ. Geogr. 2020, 40, 181–186 + 225. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xu, J.J. Research on the efficiency of Marine aquaculture production in China’s coastal provinces based on the DEA-Malmquist index. J. Guizhou Prov. Party Sch. 2020, 1, 57–68. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X. Marine Protected Areas and the National Marine Development Strategy. J. Nanjing Tech. Univ. 2017, 16, 100–105. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.; Xu, X.H. Spatial-Temporal Evolution and Regional Disparity of Economic High-Quality Development in the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Econ. Geogr. 2020, 40, 5–15. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Xiao, W.W.; Zhao, B.X.; Wang, L.L. Marine industrial cluster structure and its coupling relationship with urban development: A case pf Shandong province. Pol. Marit. Res. 2016, 23, 115–122. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, S.; Sun, H.H.; Ma, M.S.; Lu, Y.Y.; Liu, W. Vulnerability assessment of marine economic system based on comprehensive index and catastrophe progression model. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 2020, 6, 1834459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, J.; Xia, Q.; Wang, P. Comprehensive Management and Coordination Mechanism of Marine Economy. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 6616412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morrissey, K.; O’Donoghue, C. The Irish marine economy and regional development. Mar. Policy 2012, 36, 358–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, L.J.; Wang, P.; Cao, L.L.; Liu, Y.J.; Chen, L. Studies on Charges for Sea Area Utilization Management and Its Effect on the Sustainable Development of Marine Economy in Guangdong Province, China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wu, F.; Gao, Q.; Liu, T. Efficiency measurement of marine scientific and technological Innovation for marine economic Growth. Stat. Decis. 2019, 35, 119–122. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, Y. Circular economy development mode of coastal and marine areas in China and its evaluation index research—The example of Qingdao. Int. J. Bioautomation 2014, 18, 121–130. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, Y.B.; Peng, X.F.; Zhang, Y. Status of marine economic development and comprehensive evaluation of the strength in the yangtze river delta. Trop. Geogr. 2010, 30, 644–649. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liu, H.; Ma, L.; Li, G.P. Dynamic pattern and its factors of urban economic efficiency in China. Geogr. Res. 2020, 39, 880–891. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, Z.; Sun, J.Z.; Yang, X.; Liu, S.X.; Hu, Y. The Response Measures of Marine Economy to Regional Economic Development. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 35, 48–54. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, B. Efficiency Decomposition of Driving Force for Regional Economy High Quality Development and the Convergence Test of TFP Change. Rev. Econ. Manag. 2020, 36, 133–148. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, M.; Xiao, J.H. Evaluation of green development level of Marine economy in Guangdong province based on entropy method. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1774, 12012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, X.D.; Shi, X.R.; Fang, X. The internal dynamics and regional differences of China’s marine economic evolution based on comprehensive evaluation. Alex. Eng. J. 2022, 61, 7571–7583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.M.; Zhou, S.W.; Yin, K.D.; Liu, H.C. Measurement of the high-quality development level of China’s marine economy. Mar. Econ. Manag. 2021, 4, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.Y.; Xue, C.H.; Li, H.M.; Yu, K.Z. Efficiency Measurement and Determinant Factors of Marine Economy in China: Based on the Belt and Road Perspective. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2021, 2021, 5546200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, F.; Lai, X.; Xiao, C. The Model of Comprehensive Evaluation and Empirical Research on Sustainable Development of Marine Economy. Sci. Technol. Manag. Res. 2015, 35, 59–62. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Liang, H.; Amp, L.U.; Amp, R.C. An Analysis on the Comprehensive Measurements and Spatio-temporal Evolution of China’s Green Development of Marine Economy. Ocean Dev. Manag. 2019, 36, 73–83. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, L.; Cai, D.H.; Yang, N. Empirical Research on the Comprehensive Evaluation System of Marine Economy Based on Sustainable Development—The case of Bohai Sea Area. Mar. Econ. 2015, 5, 21–31. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Huang, G.H.; Zeng, J.T.; Gao, X.Y.; Liu, C.Y.; Tian, G.X. Sustainable Development of Marine Economy in Jiaodong Peninsula. Rev. Fac. De Agron. Univ. Zulia 2019, 36, 679–689. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, B.; Long, R.Y.; Zhu, C.G.; Sun, X.X.; Pan, K.Y. Comprehensive Measurement of the Index System for Marine Economy High-Quality Development in Jiangsu Province. Econ. Geogr. 2020, 40, 104–113. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wu, D.J. Impact of green total factor productivity in marine economy based on entropy method. Pol. Marit. Res. 2018, 25, 141–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, Z.Y.; Guo, T.; Fan, Y.X. Measurement of High-quality Development Level of China’s Marine Economy. Mar. Econ. 2020, 10, 13–24. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Dong, Z. A Study on the Transformation and Upgrading of Zhejiang Marine Economic Industrial Structure Based on the Analysis and Evaluation of Scientific and Technological Innovation. J. Coastal Research 2019, 98, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.Y.; Yang, Y.; Gao, X.X. Difference of Operational Efficiency of Regional Technology Markets in China—Based on DEA-BCC and DEA-Malmquist Model. Sci. Technol. Econ. 2020, 33, 36–40. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.Y.; Zhang, Z.; Han, Z.L.; Sun, C.Z.; Lin, Y.R. Response measures of the marine economy to regional economic development. Resour. Sci. 2016, 38, 1832–1845. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, X.; Guo, K.Y. Efficiency Analysis and Evaluation of Marine Economy in Coastal Areas Based on the GRA-DEA Mixed Model. Mar. Econ. 2012, 2, 5–10. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wen, M.M.; Liu, C.; Mamonov, K.A.; Du, J. Measurement of Coordinated and Coupled Development and Evaluation of Sustainable Development for Marine Economic-Ecological Complex System. Discret. Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2021, 2021, 2043635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, C.Z.; Wang, S.; Zou, W.; Wang, Z.Y. Estimating the efficiency of complex marine systems in China’s coastal regions using a network data envelopment analysis model. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2017, 139, 77–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, W.H.; Ji, J.Y.; Chen, L.; Zhang, Y. Evaluation of China’s marine economic efficiency under environmental constraints–an empirical analysis of China’s eleven coastal regions. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 806–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, X.Y.; Hu, Q.G.; Shen, W.T.; Ma, J.T. Influence of the Evolution of Marine Industry Structure on the Green Total Factor Productivity of Marine Economy. Water 2021, 13, 1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, K.D.; Li, J.Y. Measurement research on the dynamic changes of marine sustainable development in china. J. Manag. Sci. Stat. Decis. 2012, 9, 11–25. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, S. Analysis of China’s Marine Economic Regional Characteristics and Development Countermeasures for these Regions. Econ. Geogr. 2012, 32, 80–84. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Morita, H.; Hirokawa, K.; Zhu, J. A slack-based measure of efficiency in context-dependent data envelopment analysis. Omega Int. J. Manag. Sci. 2005, 33, 357–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, J.; Hu, D. Construction and empirical study of the evaluation index system for high-quality development of marine economy in Guangdong Province based on five new development concepts. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1629, 12030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.; Li, X. Evaluation Research on Optimization Efficiency of Human Resource Allocation in Marine Insurance Industry Based on Malmquist Index Model. J. Coast. Res. 2019, 94, 677–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jesus, T.P.; Knox, L.; Juan, A. Defining a new graph inefficiency measure for the proportional directional distance function and introducing a new Malmquist productivity index. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2020, 281, 222–230. [Google Scholar]
- Yue, S.J.; Sun, S.Q.; Guo, M.Q. Sustainable total factor productivity growth: The case of China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120727. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, W.Y.; Zhou, X.M. Estimate on green total factor productivity in Zhejiang Province: Based on DEA-MalmquistIndex. Sci. Technol. Econ. 2019, 32, 61–65. [Google Scholar]
Criterion Layer | Coastal Area Indicator Layer | Indicator Number | Indicator Type |
---|---|---|---|
Input indicators | Wetland area (10,000 hectares) | I1 | Cost type |
Per capita water resources (m3/person) | I2 | Cost type | |
Mariculture area (Ha) | I3 | Cost type | |
Wind power generation capacity (10,000 KW) | I4 | Beneficial | |
Phytoplankton diversity index | I5 | Cost type | |
Large zooplankton diversity index | I6 | Cost type | |
Benthic biodiversity index | I7 | Cost type | |
Total industrial wastewater discharge (10,000 tons) | I8 | Cost type | |
Industrial waste gas emission (100 million m3) | I9 | Cost type | |
Industrial smoke (powder) dust emission (100 million m3) | I10 | Cost type | |
Output indicators | Added value of marine and related industries (100 million yuan) | O1 | Beneficial |
Proportion of marine GDP in GDP of coastal areas (%) | O2 | Beneficial | |
Proportion of output value of marine primary industry (%) | O3 | Beneficial | |
Proportion of output value of marine secondary industry (%) | O4 | Beneficial | |
Proportion of output value of marine tertiary industry (%) | O5 | Beneficial | |
Number of marine-related employees (10,000 persons) | O6 | Beneficial | |
Marine passenger volume (10,000 persons) | O7 | Beneficial | |
Cargo throughput of coastal ports (10,000 tons) | O8 | Beneficial | |
Area of marine type nature reserve (hm2) | O9 | Beneficial |
The Coupling coordination degree | 0.8–1.0 | 0.7–0.8 | 0.6–0.7 | 0.5–0.6 | 0.4–0.5 | 0.3–0.4 | 0.0–0.3 |
The coupling coordination level | Excellent coordination | Good coordination | Intermediate coordination | Primary coordination | Mild dissonance | Moderate dissonance | Severe dissonance |
Element | Principal Component Input Index | Principal Component Output Index | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
Total | 5.015 | 2.684 | 1.216 | 4.533 | 2.264 | 1.505 |
Percent variance | 50.146 | 26.836 | 12.156 | 50.365 | 25.155 | 16.724 |
Accumulation | 50.146 | 76.982 | 89.138 | 50.365 | 75.52 | 92.245 |
Evaluation Factor | Principal Component Loading | Feature Vector | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | |
I8 | −0.986 | 0.052 | −0.038 | −0.440 | 0.032 | −0.035 |
I5 | 0.937 | −0.178 | −0.185 | 0.419 | −0.109 | −0.168 |
I1 | 0.906 | −0.101 | −0.193 | 0.404 | −0.062 | −0.175 |
I7 | −0.789 | 0.312 | −0.173 | −0.353 | 0.191 | −0.157 |
I6 | 0.739 | −0.061 | −0.515 | 0.330 | −0.037 | −0.467 |
I10 | 0.442 | 0.859 | 0.186 | 0.198 | 0.525 | 0.168 |
I9 | 0.504 | 0.831 | 0.181 | 0.225 | 0.507 | 0.164 |
I4 | −0.594 | 0.751 | −0.134 | −0.265 | 0.459 | −0.122 |
I2 | 0.561 | 0.617 | 0.175 | 0.251 | 0.377 | 0.159 |
I3 | 0.238 | −0.404 | 0.855 | 0.106 | −0.246 | 0.776 |
O2 | 0.933 | −0.229 | 0.121 | 0.438 | −0.152 | 0.098 |
O1 | 0.870 | 0.474 | 0.032 | 0.409 | 0.315 | 0.026 |
O6 | 0.862 | 0.481 | 0.098 | 0.405 | 0.320 | 0.080 |
O9 | −0.796 | 0.427 | −0.214 | −0.374 | 0.284 | −0.174 |
O8 | 0.791 | 0.551 | 0.215 | 0.372 | 0.366 | 0.176 |
O5 | −0.683 | 0.632 | 0.331 | −0.321 | 0.420 | 0.270 |
O4 | 0.523 | −0.842 | −0.026 | 0.246 | −0.559 | −0.021 |
O3 | 0.399 | 0.402 | −0.674 | 0.187 | 0.267 | −0.550 |
O7 | −0.063 | −0.024 | 0.907 | −0.029 | −0.016 | 0.739 |
Year | Principal Components of Input Indicators | Principal Components of Output Indicators | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 Score | F2 Score | F3 Score | F1 Score | F2 Score | F3 Score | |
2008 | 1.438 | 0.800 | 0.860 | −0.655 | 0.768 | 0.173 |
2009 | 1.663 | 0.887 | 0.187 | 0.625 | −0.076 | −0.174 |
2010 | 1.587 | 1.073 | −0.176 | 1.052 | −0.328 | 0.152 |
2011 | 1.291 | 1.210 | −0.408 | 1.151 | −0.163 | 0.585 |
2012 | 0.621 | 1.608 | −0.149 | 1.288 | 0.284 | 0.205 |
2013 | −0.037 | 1.786 | 0.400 | 1.145 | 0.674 | 0.939 |
2014 | −0.106 | 1.055 | 0.107 | 1.430 | 0.662 | 0.617 |
2015 | −0.250 | 1.156 | 0.323 | 1.538 | 0.843 | −0.147 |
2016 | −0.640 | 0.148 | 0.116 | 1.783 | 0.976 | −0.103 |
Year | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Input Indicators | 3 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
Output Indicators | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 |
Year | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H | 0.579 | 0.735 | 0.842 | 0.875 | 0.86 | 0.824 | 0.7 | 0.681 | 0.741 |
Level | Primary | Good | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | Good | Intermediate | Good |
Year | Tfpch | Sort | |
---|---|---|---|
The Comprehensive Score of Principal Component Shifts Upward by 1 Unit | The Comprehensive Score of Principal Component Shifts Upward by 0.7 Unit | ||
2009/2008 | 1.88 | 4.465 | 1 |
2010/2009 | 1.154 | 1.21 | 6 |
2011/2010 | 1.372 | 1.629 | 3 |
2012/2011 | 1.071 | 1.015 | 7 |
2013/2012 | 1.243 | 1.296 | 4 |
2014/2013 | 1.174 | 1.211 | 5 |
2015/2014 | 0.764 | 0.705 | 8 |
2016/2015 | 1.687 | 3.355 | 2 |
Mean Value | 1.251 | 1.549 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gao, S.; Sun, H.; Wang, R. Audit Evaluation and Driving Force Analysis of Marine Economic Development Quality. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116822
Gao S, Sun H, Wang R. Audit Evaluation and Driving Force Analysis of Marine Economic Development Quality. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11):6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116822
Chicago/Turabian StyleGao, Sheng, Huihui Sun, and Runjie Wang. 2022. "Audit Evaluation and Driving Force Analysis of Marine Economic Development Quality" Sustainability 14, no. 11: 6822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116822