China’s provincial CO2 emissions embodied in international and interprovincial trade

188 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The effect of technological factors on China's carbon intensity: New evidence from a panel threshold model (2018, background): “…(FDI) and trade that may enhance the environmental quality were identified by existing studies (e.g., Ang, 2009; Perkins and Neumayer, 2011; Guo et al., 2012; Ren et al., 2014; Yang et al., 2014; Seker et al., 2015; Shao et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2017; Behera and Dash, 2017; Huang et al.,…”
Spatial spillover effects in determining China's regional CO2 emissions growth: 2007–2010 (2017, background): “5 Researches on Chinese inter-regional or inter-provincial carbon emission transfer include Feng et al. (2013), Guo et al. (2012), Meng et al. (2013a), Su and Ang (2014a), H. Liu et al. (2015), L.C. Liu et al. (2015), etc. 6 At a global level, Xu andDietzenbacher (2014) applied the SDA to global…”
A study on embodied carbon transfer at the provincial level of China from a social network perspective (2019, methodology): “The EEBT approach is commonly used to calculate the scale of pollution embodied in interregional trade (Guo et al., 2012; Zhang et al., 2014), the essence of which is multiple single-region IO analyses.”
Regional development and carbon emissions in China (2019, background): “Previous studies have estimated carbon emission transfer across Chinese regions over time (Guo et al., 2012) and discussed the responsibilities of regions to reduce carbon emissions (Zhang, 2015).”