Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39309866›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Fiscal expenditure efficiency of China's coal to clean heating policy.

Fei Mo, Yaoyao Ren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Fei MoSchool of International Organizations, Beijing Foreign Studies University, 19 Xisanhuan North Road, Beijing, 100089, China.
Yaoyao RenCommodity Research Institute, China Risun Group Limited, Bldg. 1 Risun Plaza, 6 Sihezhuang Road, Beijing, 100070, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Government subsidies are the backbone of the large-scale Coal to Clean Heating Policy launched in China in 2017. We analyze data from 27 pilot cities from 2017 to 2019. We use a slacks-based measure model with undesirable outputs to evaluate the optimal design of central and local government subsidies under the policy. While the overall efficiency is high, provincial capitals and cities with lower economic development levels show less efficiency. Our findings suggest that distributing central government subsidies based solely on administrative levels is not the best way to achieve perfect efficiency. Additionally, perfect efficiency at the city level may take years to achieve. A sweeping phase-out of government subsidies could lead to undesirable policy outcomes. Content analysis of normative documents from the six best-performing cities and six least efficient cities indicates that better-formulated legal and policy documents may contribute to higher efficiency. As lessons for designing and evaluating large-scale energy policies, we recommend considering 17 factors that could impact subsidy efficiency. We also suggest implementing a progressive phase-out schedule as a measure of policy efficiency and identifying factors that could ensure the long-term success of nationally implemented government subsidies.

Indexed as

17-factor distribution modelCoal to clean heating policyData envelopment analysisFive-dimensionGovernment subsidiesSlacks-based measure model with undesirable outputs

Identifiers

PMID39309866
PMCPMC11416265

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.