ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Multi-Agents-Based Modeling and Simulation for Carbon Permits Trading in China: A Regional Development Perspective.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) an Effective Market-Incentivized Environmental Regulation Policy? Evidence from China's Eight ETS Pilots.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
China has been actively taking actions to control carbon emissions and promoting development of a carbon market. However, there are many disadvantages in a carbon market, owing to various designs and policies still under trial and implementation. Adopting the multi-agents technique, we constructed a framework about national carbon market to estimate the effect of a different design of policy made on the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and environment. In particular, national and regional abatement policies were analyzed in our study. The results showed the carbon-trading mechanism can effectively reduce carbon emissions and make a negative impact on GDP. National abatement can neither be too high nor too low for reducing carbon emissions and maintaining economic stability. For different regions, the central region was impacted the most by a carbon trading mechanism, and the east region was the opposite. Moreover, the "sweeping approach" policy should be replaced by a regional "discriminating policy" because the abatement requirement to the western region was low and to the eastern region was relatively high, which is more beneficial to China's regional development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.