Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40104391›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and ecotechnology2025

A holistic approach to evaluating environmental policy impact using a difference-in-differences model.

Jianglong Cui, Tiansen Zou, Hengyuan Zhao, Xiaodie Zhang, Guowen Li, Shengwang Gao, Chunjian Lv, Qiuheng Zhu, Lieyu Zhang, Haisheng Li

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and ecotechnology, 2025. 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

10 authors.

Jianglong CuiState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Tiansen ZouState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Hengyuan ZhaoStrategy Research Department, China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation, Beijing, 100033, China.
Xiaodie ZhangState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Guowen LiState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Shengwang GaoState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Chunjian LvState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Qiuheng ZhuCenter for Eco-Environment Research, Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Nanjing, 210098, China.
Lieyu ZhangState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.
Haisheng LiState Key Laboratory of Environmental Criteria and Risk Assessment, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental protection policies (EPPs) play a pivotal role in advancing sustainable development and maintaining ecological balance by establishing clear directives and standards. However, a comprehensive methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of these policies remains underdeveloped. Here, we employ a difference-in-differences (DID) approach to assess the effectiveness of EPPs, using the implementation of the Resident Work (RW) policy as a quasi-natural experiment. Drawing on urban-level panel data from the Yangtze River Basin between 2016 and 2021, we demonstrate that the DID model robustly evaluates the RW policy's impact on water quality improvement. Cities that adopted the RW policy experienced a 0.0098 reduction in water pollution compared to non-adopting cities. A dynamic analysis revealed progressive water quality improvements over time, with stronger effects observed in economically disadvantaged cities. Furthermore, higher policy evaluation scores correlated with greater improvements in water quality. This study highlights the utility of the DID model in quantifying EPP effectiveness and offers a scalable framework for policy evaluation in environmental management.

Indexed as

Difference-in-differencesEnvironmental protection policiesResident work policyWater qualityYangtze River Basin

Identifiers

PMID40104391
PMCPMC11919377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.