ArticlePloS one2024
Exploration of forestry carbon sequestration practice path in Guizhou province-based on evolutionary game model.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Guizhou Province has abundant forest resources, and it has great economic value and social benefits to explore the practical path of forestry carbon sequestration. Based on the current situation of forestry carbon sequestration development in Guizhou Province, this paper innovatively integrates forestry carbon sequestration indicators into the existing Environmental, Social and Governance(ESG) evaluation system using an evolutionary game model. It analyzes the factors restricting forestry carbon sequestration and explores the influencing factors of forestry carbon sequestration benefit sharing bodies in Guizhou. Through regression analysis, the paper discusses the impact of enterprise ESG scores, government subsidy amounts, and forestry carbon sequestration costs on forestry carbon sequestration purchase volume. The research results show that enterprise ESG scores and government subsidy amounts have a significant positive impact on enterprise forestry carbon sequestration purchase volume, while forestry carbon sequestration costs have a significant negative impact. The results have passed the robustness test in different industries. The simulation analysis results show that the stable point of the evolutionary game is (1,0,1) and (1,1,0), which verifies that the ESG rating system with forestry carbon sequestration integration can promote enterprises to purchase more forestry carbon sequestration, i.e., the effectiveness of forestry carbon sequestration in activating the ESG rating system mechanism. Based on the research conclusions, the paper puts forward policy implications: the government should accelerate the construction of localized ESG rating systems, improve enterprise information disclosure and supervision, increase subsidies and reduce forestry carbon sequestration costs, and optimize carbon quota design.
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.