1. Introduction
The Opinions on Accelerating the Overall Green Transformation of Economic and Social Development of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council explicitly proposed that an economic system of green, low-carbon and recycling development should be initially formed by 2035, which also provides a new way of thinking for the country to promote green, low-carbon transformation and high-quality development. As a special economic system, the green, low-carbon and circular development economic system can be understood as the concept and mode of green development, low-carbon development and circular development running through all links, levels and areas of economic development, and the formation of a resource-saving, environmentally friendly and low-carbon energy-based economic development model [
1]. Since the mid-20th century, Western developed countries have reflected on the traditional development model in the process of industrialization and have gradually formed new development concepts such as the circular economy and low-carbon economy to promote the coordinated development of economic growth and resources and the environment. In this process, developed countries, through the adjustment of the global industrial division of labor, have shifted the middle and low-end segments of their manufacturing industries to developing countries, and transformed their own industrial structure to the service industry [
2]. Data show that the proportion of the service industry in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and other countries has exceeded 70 percent of the total national economy, and while realizing the decoupling of economic growth and resource consumption they have also basically solved local environmental problems. For example, European Union countries reached peak resource consumption and emissions in the early 1990s, while the United States peaked in carbon around 2005. In contrast, developing countries are facing more complex green development challenges in the course of rapid industrialization and urbanization [
3]. Not only do they need to deal with local environmental pollution problems, but they also have to assume the same responsibility for global climate governance as developed countries. China’s practice in exploring green, low-carbon and recycling development paths was therefore particularly important as the largest developing country [
4]. Its experience would not only contribute to the construction of a domestic resource-saving society and the realization of the goal of reducing pollution and carbon emissions but would also provide other developing countries with a model for industrial transformation that could be used as a reference.
At the same time, the successful experience of developed economies shows that in the process of economic structural transformation, the synergistic development of manufacturing and productive services has become an important direction of industrial evolution, and its theoretical connotation and practice mode have been deepening since Ellison and Glaeser (1997) [
5] proposed it. Early research was based on a Marshallian economic efficiency orientation, which has evolved into a systemic paradigm incorporating eco-efficiency, with the European Union’s “industrial symbiosis” model combining the circular economy and industrial agglomeration through by-product exchange networks [
6]. This model can effectively enhance resource utilization efficiency and reduce raw material consumption and environmental pollution. Its core lies in converting waste from one production chain into inputs for another, thus forming a closed-loop flow of materials similar to that of a natural ecosystem. Current research focuses on the two dimensions of formation drivers and effects, where regional differences such as the degree of economic development, human resources and other factors affect the synergistic agglomeration of manufacturing industries [
7], while transaction costs constrain the synergy between manufacturing and productive services [
8]. However, the academic community has not yet reached a consensus on the relationship between synergistic agglomeration and green development. Established studies identify nonlinear relationships such as the inverted U-shape [
9] and U-shape [
10], and specific regions such as the Yangtze River Economic Belt also show the evolutionary characteristics of inhibition followed by promotion [
11].
The interaction mechanism between industrial synergistic agglomeration and the green, low-carbon and recycling economy has also become an emerging research frontier. However, there are still significant research gaps. On the one hand, the mechanism of synergistic agglomeration of manufacturing and productive service industries has not yet formed a systematic theoretical framework; on the other hand, there is a lack of sufficient theoretical and empirical evidence to support its regional green economy spillover effect. Existing studies have shown that industrial synergistic agglomeration has a multi-dimensional impact on the green economy, and Liu Jun et al. [
8] found that industrial synergistic agglomeration has a facilitating effect on the efficiency of green innovation, and there is a regional heterogeneity characterized by “high in the east and low in the west”. However, the economic effects of synergistic agglomeration are complex in nature; Song [
12] reveals that the impact of industrial synergistic agglomeration on the green efficiency of local industrial firms is characterized by an inverted U-shape, while Chen et al. (2022) [
13] demonstrate that the intensity of environmental regulation is a key variable in moderating this nonlinear relationship. Notably, Jian D’s (2022) [
14] study breaks through the local perspective and confirms that synergistic agglomeration not only enhances regional green performance but also has spatial spillover effects across regions, which provides an important direction for subsequent studies.
To summarize, this study systematically searched Chinese and English databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI and ScienceDirect, and adopted “green low-carbon circular economy” and its related terms (such as “sustainable development”, “circular development”, etc.) as the core keyword combinations. The term “green low-carbon circular economy” and its related terms (e.g., “sustainable development”, “circular development”, etc.) were used as the core keyword combinations. The timeframe of the literature was limited to 1997–2025, focusing on the research progress in the last five years (2019–2024). The inclusion criteria include (1) peer-reviewed academic papers; (2) studies directly exploring the theory or practice of the green, low-carbon, and circular economy; (3) clear methodological contributions or empirical findings. Finally, the study found that research on the mechanism of the role of the synergistic agglomeration of manufacturing and productive service industries on the green, low-carbon and circular development of the economy and its spatial effects is still insufficient, and the intrinsic connection has not yet been clarified. Incorporating the economic and spatial effects of synergistic industrial agglomeration and green, low-carbon and circular development into a unified analytical framework is rarely considered.
6. Conclusions and Policy Implications
This paper analyzes the impact mechanism of the synergistic agglomeration of the productive service industry and manufacturing industry on the green, low-carbon and recycling development economy through empirical research using 30 provinces and cities in China, as samples from 2010 to 2022. Secondly, the economic impact of industrial synergistic agglomeration on green, low-carbon and recycling development has spatial spillover effects on neighboring regions, and the diffusion effect is greater than the return effect. Thirdly, there is regional and economic development level heterogeneity in the economic impact of industrial synergistic agglomeration on green, low-carbon and recycling development. As far as regional heterogeneity is concerned, there is an obvious promotion effect of industrial cooperative agglomeration on the high-quality development of the green, low-carbon and recycling economy in the northern region; as far as the level of economic development is concerned, in the regions with a lower level of economic development the industrial cooperative agglomeration has a significant positive driving effect on the high-quality development of the green, low-carbon and recycling economy. Fourthly, environmental regulations negatively inhibit the impact of industrial synergistic agglomeration on the green, low-carbon and recycling economy, while the level of regional industrialization positively moderates the impact of industrial synergistic agglomeration on the green, low-carbon and recycling economy. Based on the above findings, this paper puts forward the following policy recommendations:
Firstly, it is necessary to enhance the spatial spillover effect of collaborative industrial aggregation in order to break through the spatial barriers of factors, to establish cross-regional industrial collaborative innovation centers, to set up shared R&D platforms in the junction zone, to implement the industrial chain digital twin system, and to realize the real-time matching and traceability of cross-regional production capacity, technology and human resources through blockchain technology.
Secondly, a “service-for-capacity” sharing model has been implemented to continuously promote the deep integration and mutual penetration of productive services and the manufacturing industry. Manufacturing enterprises are encouraged to divest non-core processes such as logistics and R&D to be undertaken by specialized service enterprises, and enterprises that have divested their businesses are given three-year income tax exemptions. (For example, the Hangzhou “Chain Factory” platform has led to a 32 percentage improvement in collaboration efficiency, and the Suzhou Industrial Park has established the country’s first “Manufacturing Service Innovation Centre”, which has promoted 300+ manufacturing enterprises to outsource 30 percent of their non-core business.).
Lastly, we should promote synergistic industrial agglomeration in accordance with local conditions. For cities in underdeveloped regions, this is the establishment of digital infrastructure facilities and productive service facilities supporting the realization of logistics, testing equipment, cross-enterprise deployment, and industrial development to create a favorable “hard” environment. For heavy polluters in the north, it is mandatory to install real-time monitoring equipment for pollution sources and to provide access to green financial credit systems, opening up “green credit fast-tracks” for enterprises that meet the standards and at the same time granting a 30 percent financial subsidy for outsourcing costs to heavy polluters that take the initiative to implement outsourcing.
It should be noted in particular that, limited to the availability of data, the research in this paper actually still relies on macro statistics, and it is difficult to obtain subsectors (e.g., high-end equipment manufacturing and scientific and technological services) or accurately matched data from the city level to examine the impact of the benefits of industrial synergistic agglomeration.