The effect of joint prevention and control plan on atmospheric pollution governance and residents’ willingness to pay

Environment, Development and Sustainability https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02660-5 The effect of joint prevention and control plan on atmospheric pollution governance and residents’ willingness to pay Shian Zeng1,2 · Chengdong Yi1 Received: 30 August 2021 / Accepted: 30 August 2022 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022 Abstract This study investigates the governance effect of China’s joint prevention and control of atmospheric pollution (JPCAP) plan and residents’ willingness to pay for clean air. First, this study delves into the JPCAP plan’s atmospheric pollution governance effect using the difference-in-difference and spatial difference-in-difference models. The results showed that the atmospheric pollution in Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei (BTH) and surrounding cities have significant spatial autocorrelation characteristics. From the autumn and winter of 2017 to 2019, the JPCAP plan implemented by BTH atmospheric pollution transmission channel cities significantly reduced atmospheric pollution. However, the atmospheric pollution governance effect of the JPCAP plan is weaker in 2018–2019 than in 2017–2018. Second, this study introduced the air quality index and three atmospheric pollutants—PM2.5, NO2, and SO2—into the hedonic price model and investigated the residents’ willingness to pay by employing the spatial error model and spatial lag model. Finally, subsample and quantile regression were used to discuss the heterogeneity of residents’ willingness to pay. The results show that the reduction in atmospheric pollution increases residents’ willingness to pay for clean air. Residents have different willingness to pay for reducing different atmospheric pollutants, and there is heterogeneity in willingness to pay across regions and consumption levels. Residents in areas with the JPCAP plan have a higher willingness to pay than those without the JPCAP plan, and there is no spatial autocorrelation characteristic of the willingness to pay of residents in BTH and surrounding cities. Keywords Joint prevention and control of atmospheric pollution · Atmospheric pollution governance · Willingness to pay · Spatial econometrics · Hedonic price model * Shian Zeng 1 School of Management Science and Engineering, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China 2 Present Address: Central University of Finance and Economics, Shahe University Park, Beijing 102206, China 13 Vol.:(0123456789) S. Zeng, C. Yi 1 Introduction China’s urbanization, industry, and transportation modernization are altering the country’s atmospheric pollution features. Regional and compound atmospheric pollution problems are becoming increasingly prominent, and atmospheric pollution has noticeable spatial spillover effects (Bao et al., 2015; Jiang et al., 2020; Tian et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2022a; Yan et al., 2018). In the context of China’s administrative vertical management, the current environmental management system with “territorial” characteristics cannot match the air basin boundary of regional and complex atmospheric pollution. Therefore, implementing joint prevention and control of atmospheric pollution (JPCAP) has become an inevitable choice. China’s initial exploration of the JPCAP began in 1998 with the implementation of the acid rain control zone and sulfur dioxide control areas, or “two control zones.”1 With the realization of the goal of “two control zones,” China has established JPCAP mechanisms in the Beijing–Tianjin–Heibei (BTH), Pearl River Delta (PRD), and Yangtze River Delta (YRD) urban agglomerations. In May 2010, China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (CMEP) issued the Guideline on Promoting Joint Prevention and Control of Atmospheric Pollution to Improve Regional Air Quality, marking joint prevention and control as the primary means of atmospheric pollution management. The heavy industry-based industrial structure and coal-based energy structure of Tianjin and Hebei have made BTH the most polluted region in China. Especially in the autumn and winter seasons, unfavorable meteorological conditions for atmospheric pollution dispersion and coal-fired heating in rural areas exacerbate haze pollution. According to CMEP monitoring statistics, the percentage of good air quality days in the BTH region was only 56% in 2016, 22 percentage points below the national average. In the assessment of air quality for 74 Chinese cities, nine of the ten cities with relatively bad air quality are located in this region. During the heating season of 2016, the average concentration of PM2.5 in the BTH region was 135 μg/m3, which was 2.4 times the concentration during the non-heating season.2 In December alone, there were five large-scale severe haze pollution incidents in this area. China has accumulated some experience in implementing the JPCAP. The joint control of atmospheric pollution during the Beijing Olympics, Shanghai World Expo, and the two sessions achieved positive results (Shi et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2016; Zhou & Elder, 2013). In order to more effectively improve the air quality in autumn and winter in the BTH area, CMEP and other departments began to promulgate the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei and Surrounding Cities’ Action Plan for Comprehensive Treatment of Atmospheric Pollution in Autumn and Winter of 2017–2018 (hereinafter referred to as “2017–2018 JPCAP plan”), which marks the adoption of joint prevention and control mechanisms to combat atmospheric pollution. One of the main goals of the “2017–2018 JPCAP plan” was to reduce the average concentration of P M2.5 in atmospheric pollution transmission channel cities (2 + 26) by about 15%, year-on-year, and reduce the number of heavy and above pollution days by about 15%, year-on-year. Moreover, the “2017–2018 JPCAP plan” determines the city scope (“2 + 26” cities) and governance time (from October 2017 to March 2018) of 1 Notice of Approval by the State Council on Issues Relating to Acid Rain Control Areas and Sulphur Dioxide Pollution Control Areas. 2 In the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the heating season typically lasts from November through March of the following year. 13 The effect of joint prevention and control plan on atmospheric… Fig. 1  Comparison of air quality index in autumn and winter 2016, 2017, and 2018 in “2 + 26” cities. a Autumn and winter of 2016. b Autumn and winter of 2017. c Autumn and winter of 2018 JPCAP.3 Therefore, when the “2017–2018 JPCAP plan” meets the parallel trend hypothesis, it is applicable and convenient to employ the difference-in-difference (DID) model to investigate the atmospheric pollution governance effect since the plan has determined the specific regional scope and implementation time, which provides a ready-made basis for the division of experimental group and control group. The basic idea of the DID model is to treat public policy as a natural experiment and to obtain the net effect by subtracting the change in the outcome variab (...truncated)