Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32722256›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Determinants of Public-Private Partnership Adoption in Solid Waste Management in Rural China.

Dan Pan, Huan Chen, Guzhen Zhou, Fanbin Kong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dan PanSchool of Economics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China.
Huan ChenSchool of Economics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China.
Guzhen ZhouSchool of Economics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang 330013, China.
Fanbin KongSchool of Economics and Management, Zhejiang A&F University, Hangzhou 311300, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rural solid waste management is a severe challenge in China. The Public-Private Partnership (PPP) is an effective method for rural solid waste management. However, policy efforts aimed at stimulating the adoption of PPP in rural solid waste management have been limited in their success. This study aims to empirically investigate the determinants of rural solid waste management PPP adoption in China. First, this study builds a theoretical model that consists of factors related to the institutional environment and market and proposes theoretical hypotheses. Then, using the balanced provincial panel data of 150 samples from 2015 to 2019, this study applies various count regression models and truncated regression models to empirically test the theoretical hypotheses. The results show that provinces with higher fiscal transparency, financial burdens, and market demand tend to adopt more PPP, while provinces with lower per capita GDP and market openness index ratings have a stronger motivation to initiate more PPP. In contrast, investment institutional environment factors have no impact on PPP adoption. To stimulate the development of PPP in rural solid waste management, this study proposed that a good-governed government and a strong market demand are critical foundations, and also a debt-risk prevention and evaluation system should be established to avoid local debt risks resulting from over-adoption of PPP.

Indexed as

Solid WasteWaste ManagementChinaGovernmentHumansPublic-Private Sector PartnershipsSolid WasteChinaPPP adoptionPublic-Private Partnership (PPP)solid waste management

Identifiers

PMID32722256
PMCPMC7432355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.