sustainability

Article
Does High-Speed Rail Operation Reduce Ecological
Environment Pressure?—Empirical Evidence from China
Changjun Jiang and Xiaoxuan Liu *

College of Public Administration, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China; jcjland@163.com
* Correspondence: xiaoxuanliu2022@163.com

Abstract: With improved productivity, the impact of social and economic development on the ecolog-
ical environment is becoming more and more significant, and the transformation of transportation
modes often accompanies the transformation of the economic development mode. It is essential to
study the impact of high-speed rail (HSR) on the environment. This article constructs a compiled
index Ecological Environment Pressure (EEP) evaluation system. The spatial analysis tool is then
used to explore the temporal and spatial evolution characteristics of EEP in China. The Difference-in-
Difference (DID) method and the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method are used to quantitatively
calculate the impact of HSR operations on EEP based on Panel Data. The results show that the EEP
in China decreased significantly from 2003 to 2018, and therefore the quality of China’s ecological
environment is improving. The regression coefficient of HSR on EEP is significantly negative, in-
dicating that HSR operations will reduce EEP. Additionally, the HSR operation in the eastern and
central regions negatively impacts the EEP. At the same time, the HSR operations will also reduce the
EEP of resource-based cities, especially for resource-based cities in the central region. The degree of
industrial transformation (DIT) and degree of employment transformation (DET), combined with the
implementation of HSR operations, can significantly reduce the EEP. It is suggested to formulate more
focused actions and policies to reduce EEP and effectively promote sustainable social development.






Citation: Jiang, C.; Liu, X. Does
Keywords: ecological environment pressure; HSR; panel regression
High-Speed Rail Operation Reduce
Ecological Environment Pressure?—
Empirical Evidence from China.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152. https:// 1. Introduction
doi.org/10.3390/su14063152 Humans are the most active contributors to the ecosystem. Since the 1860s, humanity
Academic Editor: Mariano Gallo has created a brilliant material civilization with the help of powerful technological means [1].
Technological changes are reflected in the changes in transportation modes, which will
Received: 21 January 2022 impact the development of the ecological environment. The construction of transportation
Accepted: 4 March 2022
infrastructure brings convenience to people’s lives and promotes social progress but also
Published: 8 March 2022
causes damage to the environment to varying degrees. Many studies have explored the
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral relationship between traffic activities and environmental pollution. In the early stage of
with regard to jurisdictional claims in research, most scholars undertake qualitative analysis studies. For example, Mohring
published maps and institutional affil- (1987) believes that rail transit facilities can attract some private car drivers to transfer to
iations. other modes of transportation, reducing urban air pollution [2]. Scholars then began to
demonstrate the various factors related to pollution emission in the transportation network
and the degree of their influence.
Environmental issues are not conducive to regional economic development, which
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
affects the growth of economic efficiency and the health of residents [3]. Therefore, a
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
United Nations report put forward a sustainable development strategy, and sustainable
This article is an open access article
development has since become the consensus of society. Countries worldwide place the
distributed under the terms and
issue of ecological environmental protection in a vital position in the country’s future
conditions of the Creative Commons
development. At present, the world’s environmental problems mainly come from three
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
aspects: the pressure of industrial pollution [4], the pressure of ecological restoration and
4.0/).
protection [5], and the pressure caused by the unsatisfactory living environment [6]. Since

Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063152 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 2 of 16

the 1970s, due to the energy crisis, technological progress, and traffic safety issues, people
have realized HSR’s social and economic value. HSR has gradually become a new demand
for modern social and economic development [7,8]. With this efficient new rail transit, can
the development of HSR effectively reduce EEP?
In recent years, some scholars have tried to explore the changing characteristics of
the ecological environment from HSR operations. Their studies found that HSR uses less
fossil fuels and contributes to the reducing of carbon emissions compared to traditional
modes of transportation [9]. In the life cycle of HSR, the line construction stage’s energy
consumption and carbon emissions are the largest [10]. It is widely believed that the role
of HSR in reducing pollution is achieved by changing the choice of private travel modes,
thereby reducing vehicle exhaust emissions. Some scholars have discussed the impact of
the opening of HSR from the perspective of factor flow from space. They believe that the
opening of HSR aggravates the “siphon effect” or “spillover effect” of central cities and
promotes the economic growth of central cities. The transfer of industries with high energy
consumption and low added value to the surrounding cities has adversely affected the
ecological environment of small cities [11–13]. Some studies have also found that HSR can
reduce pollution by replacing traditional transportation methods. However, the expansion
of output scale brought about by HSR operations will also increase pollution emissions,
offset the emission reduction effect and ultimately hurt the environment [14].
There are two main viewpoints in the research literature on the impact of HSR opera-
tion on the ecological environment. First, the operation of HSR will improve the quality
of the regional ecological environment by significantly reducing a single indicator of the
ecological environment. These indicators mainly include carbon dioxide emissions, air
pollution, and soil quality. Second, compared with other modes of transportation, HSR
does cause minor damage to the ecological environment, but HSR operation also nega-
tively affects ecological and environmental indicators. In natural science, scholars often
use scientific instruments to measure air quality, soil quality and water quality and then
obtain the impact of HSR construction on the environment. In social science, research
on the relationship between HSR and the ecological environment mainly includes HSR
operation, carbon dioxide emissions, air pollution, and a green economy. At the same time,
the research methods mostly use measurement methods, such as traditional mediation
utility models, structural equation models, and policy evaluation models.
In conclusion, HSR is the product of this new era. There are few studies on the impact
of HSR on the environment. Most of these studies focus on unilateral and single index
research on HSR operation and the ecological environment, lack of research on the temporal
and spatial evolution of the ecological environment. They cannot reflect the relationship
between HSR operations and the overall level of ecological environment development. The
research dimension is relatively single.
The purpose of this paper is to solve two research questions. First of all, from the
comprehensive evaluation of the ecological environment pressure index system, does
the operation of HSR also have the phenomenon of effectively alleviating the ecological
environment pressure? Second, how does the operation of HSR affect the pressure on
the ecological environment? This paper selects China as the research object to explore
the impact of HSR construction on the pressure on the ecological environment. In the
21st century, with the rapid development of China’s economy, China’s HSR has ushered
in an uptake in construction. By the end of 2019, China’s HSR operating mileage was
35,000 km, accounting for about 70% of the world’s total HSR mileage. At the same time,
as the largest developing country, coordinating economic construction and environmental
protection issues in China is an essential link for developing countries to implement
sustainable development strategies. Therefore, it is significant to take China as a research
area. The main research objectives of this paper are as follows: (1) Construct an index
system that can better reflect the pressure on the ecological environment; and (2) Explore the
heterogeneous impact of HSR operations under the pressure of the ecological environment.
The effect of environmental stress and the mechanism of HSR construction on EEP is
 better reflect the pressure on the ecological environment; and (2) Explore the heterogene-
ous impact of HSR operations under the pressure of the ecological environment. The effect
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 3 of 16
of environmental stress and the mechanism of HSR construction on EEP is analyzed. Ex-
ploring the relationship between HSR construction and EEP is of great practical signifi-
cance for developing countries to formulate scientific and reasonable social and economic
analyzed. Exploring
development the relationship
policies and between
to reduce EEP. HSR construction
This study provides anand EEP is ofreference
important great practical
for
significance
developing for developing
countries’ countries
environmental to formulate
protection, scientific
regional and reasonable
development, social and
and ecological
economicconstruction.
civilization development policies and to reduce EEP. This study provides an important
reference for developing countries’ environmental protection, regional development, and
ecological and
2. Materials civilization
Methods construction.
2.1. Study Area
2. Materials and Methods
The
2.1. research
Study Area area includes 284 primary research regions, including 101 research units
in the eastern region, 100 research units in the central region and 83 research units in the
The research area includes 284 primary research regions, including 101 research units
western region, as shown in Figure 1. China’s eastern, central and western regions have
in the eastern region, 100 research units in the central region and 83 research units in the
different
westernlevels of as
region, economic
shown in development and different
Figure 1. China’s degreesand
eastern, central of industrial transfor-
western regions have
mation, which leads to differences in environmental pollution problems in
different levels of economic development and different degrees of industrial transformation,different re-
gions
whichto aleads
certainto extent. In this
differences in paper, when studying
environmental theproblems
pollution impact of inHSR construction
different regionsonto a
thecertain
EEP ofextent.
different regions, exploring the relationship between HSR construction
In this paper, when studying the impact of HSR construction on the EEP and of
EEPdifferent regions, exploring the relationship between HSR construction and EEP is ofand
is of great practical significance for developing countries to formulate scientific great
reasonable
practical social and economic
significance development
for developing countries policies and reduce
to formulate EEP.
scientific andUsing the panel
reasonable social
data,
andbased on thedevelopment
economic calculation of the EEP
policies index,
and reducetheEEP.
temporal
Usingandthespatial evolution
panel data, basedchar-
on the
acteristics
calculationof China’s urban
of the EEP ecological
index, pressure
the temporal arespatial
and explored. The impact
evolution of HSR construc-
characteristics of China’s
tion on EEP
urban is quantitatively
ecological pressure are calculated
explored. Thebased on the
impact Difference-in-Difference
of HSR construction on EEP is(DID) quanti-
method. The appropriate use of sub-regional research is important for formulating
tatively calculated based on the Difference-in-Difference (DID) method. The appropriate envi-
ronmental protection research
use of sub-regional policies isand sustainable
important development
for formulating policies according
environmental to policies
protection local
conditions.
and sustainable development policies according to local conditions.

Figure 1. Description of the study area.

Figure 1. Description of the study area.
2.2. Indicator System
2.2. Indicator System
As argued in previous studies, EEP includes the negative effects of resources and the
As argued in
environment previous
caused studies, EEP
by population includes
and the growth
economic negativeandeffects
humanof resources
actions toand the
improve
environment caused
the ecological by population
environment. The and
EEPeconomic
is formedgrowth
by the and human
coupling of actions
humans’ to destruction
improve
theofecological
the ecological environment and humans’ protection of the ecological environment.of
environment. The EEP is formed by the coupling of humans’ destruction The
theEEP
ecological environment
index system shouldand humans’
reflect protectionrelationship
the interactive of the ecological environment.
between humans and Thethe
EEP index systemwhich
environment, shouldis reflect
dynamic.the interactive relationship
If human demand between
for the humansisand
environment the en- it
excessive,
vironment,
will cause damage to the ecological environment, and the EEP will increase. Whenithuman
which is dynamic. If human demand for the environment is excessive, will
demand for the environment is appropriate and willing to protect the environment, the
EEP will decrease.
Excessive demands on natural materials and energy in resource development will
bring about high potential risks from the perspective of natural resources. The shortage
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 4 of 16

of water resources and mineral resources are both problems that affect the future. On the
one hand, the human demand for land, water, fossil fuels, organisms and other natural
resources is increasing, causing the problem of resource shortage. On the other hand,
human beings discharge more and more pollutants into soil, water and the atmosphere,
increasing environmental pollution. Therefore, this paper selects five indicators to represent
the human consumption of natural environmental resources, including soot emission [15],
carbon dioxide emission [16], wastewater emission [17], social power consumption [18]
and PM2.5 [19].
From the perspective of human protection of the natural environment, some countries
have banned deforestation and established national ecological protection bases. Moreover,
they have vigorously publicized the awareness of protecting the natural environment so
that people can consciously protect it, such as by waste classification and treatment, waste
recycling, planting trees and grass, and restoring vegetation coverage. At the same time, in
terms of social production, more industries with high technology and high output value
are used to replace industries with high energy consumption. Based on this, five indicators
are selected to indicate the degree of human protection of the ecological environment,
including the comprehensive utilization rate of industrial solids [20], greening areas [21],
the sewage treatment rate [22], the degree of employment structure and the degree of
industrial transformation [23].
This paper then establishes the EEP index rating system, as shown in Table 1. Carbon
dioxide emission from scientific data [24], PM2.5 data are from the Atmospheric Composi-
tion Analysis Group of Dalhousie University. This paper adopts the mean method to fill in
the areas with missing data and the years with missing data. The setting principle of action
direction is if the growth of the index is conducive to reducing the EEP, the action direction
is negative; if the growth of this index is conducive to the increase in the EEP, the action
direction is positive.

Table 1. Indicators of the Ecological Environment Pressure (EEP).

Action
Target Layer Index Layer Average S.D Min Max Weight
Direction
Soot emission (10 thousand tons) 254 343 0.34 5360 0.0647 +
Carbon dioxide emissions (10 thousand tons) 25.35 23.22 1.53 230.71 0.0613 +
Wastewater discharge (10 thousand tons) 7082.35 9430 7 110,763 0.0613 +
Social electricity consumption (KW·h) 89.87 150 0.23 1600 0.0360 +
PM2.5 (µg/m3 ) 36.15 16.43 2.18 90.85 0.1803 +
EEP
Comprehensive utilization rate of industrial
78.30 23.17 0.24 100 0.1791 −
solid (%)
Greening area (hm2 ) 36.74 9 0.38 95.25 0.0360 −
Sewage treatment rate (%) 69.40 25.75 0.16 100 0.1060 −
Degree of employment structure (%) 52.91 13.17 9.91 94.81 0.1060 −
Degree of industrial transformation (%) 37.87 9.21 8.58 85.34 0.1693 −

2.3. Model Construction

2.3.1. Model Setting of EEP Calculation
Index Weight Determination Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process
In this paper, AHP is one of the important methods to calculate the weight [25]. First,
the AHP is used to determine the index weight, and then the TOPSIS method is used to
evaluate the system. Therefore, this paper also uses the AHP-TOPSIS method to evaluate
EEP to determine the explained variables. Since the analytic hierarchy process must strictly
comply with the consistency test hypothesis, the analytic hierarchy process requires more
subjective scoring of multiple experts. Therefore, this research does not directly invite
experts to calculate the weights through the analytic hierarchy process but uses five experts
in related fields to score the indicators’ importance. It then calculates the average score of
the experts and ranks the evaluation indicators according to the average of the scores of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 5 of 16

different indicators (Table S1). Based on the order of importance of the indicator, this paper
compares the indicators in pairs, determines the importance of the indicator, and calculates
the indicator’s weight (Table S2). Calculated by the AHP formula (Formulas (S1)–(S4)), the
consistency test result in this paper is 0.002, which is in line with the hypothesis.

TOPSIS Model Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process

The TOPSIS method is ranked according to the proximity between a limited number
of evaluation objects. It evaluates the relative advantages and disadvantages of existing
objects [26]. At present, the TOPSIS method has been widely used in evaluating ecological
environment [27]. Due to the different data dimensions, the original data needs to be
standardized before the TOPSIS evaluation. The commonly used standardization methods
include deviation standardization and standard deviation standardization. Considering
that this paper’s index system contains positive and negative indicators, we adopt an
extreme value standardization for normalization [28].
Standardization formula of negative indicators:


Rij − min Rij
rij =

(1)
max Rij − min Rij

Standardization formula of positive indicators:

max Rij − Rij
rij =

(2)
max Rij − min Rij

Here, Rij represents the original value; rij represents the standardized value, i repre-
sents the index and j represents the year. At the same time, this paper uses an analytic
hierarchy process to determine the index weight, and the weight of each index is shown in
Table 1. The weighting matrix based on the index weight:
   
Y = yij m∗n = wi ∗ rij m∗n (3)

The positive ideal solution and negative ideal solution are represented by the maxi-
mum (yi+ ) and minimum values (yi− ) of the index value of matrix (Y). The distance from
−
each index to positive ideal solution ( d+
j ) and negative ideal solution ( d j ) is calculated.
r
m
∑ j =1

2
d+
j = yi+ − yij (4)

r
m
∑ j =1

2
d−
j = yi− − yij (5)

d−
j
Cij = − (6)
d+
j + dj

Based on the meaning of data standardization in this paper, the greater the C is, the
greater the EEP is. On the contrary, the smaller the pasting progress is, the smaller the
EEP of the city is. The calculate the regression in the follow-up and observe the regression
coefficient; the pasting progress is expanded ten times. The interval C of the final posting
progress is [0, 10].

2.3.2. Difference-in-Difference Method

The Difference-in-difference (DID) method allows the existence of unobservable factors.
It allows unobservable factors to affect whether individuals accept the prediction, relaxes
the conditions of policy effect evaluation to a certain extent, and makes the policy effect
evaluation model closer to the real economy [29]. Therefore, this method has been widely
used. HSR operation is generally exogenous compared with microeconomic entities,
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 6 of 16

so there is no reverse causality problem. This method is very effective in preventing

endogenous problems.
Moreover, under the traditional method, the policy effect is evaluated mainly by
setting a virtual variable of whether the policy occurs or not and then using regression. In
comparison, the model setting of the double-difference method is more scientific and can
estimate the policy effect more accurately. The formula is:

Cit = α + β( Gi × Dt ) + β 1 × Xit + µi + τt + ε it (7)

In the formula, Gi is a grouped virtual variable (processing group = 1, control group = 0);
Dt is a staged dummy variable (after the operation of HSR = 1, before the operation of
HSR = 0), The areas after the opening of HSR are set as the treatment group. The areas
without HSR are set as the control group. An area with HSR is represented by 1, and
one without HSR is represented by 0. The interaction term Gi × Dt represents the effect
of the treatment group after the operation of HSR, and its coefficient is the treatment
effect, µi represents individual fixed effect, τt represents time fixed effect and other control
variables Xit .
This paper selects five indicators as control variables by referring to relevant research.
Local government service capacity (GSC): this indicator is expressed by the number of local
government officials. Generally speaking, the more government officials, the stronger the
service capacity of government institutions. Highway traffic passenger volume (HTPV)
presents the total number of passengers passing through road traffic during the year. The
proportion of the employed industrial population (IEPP) is the ratio of secondary industry
employment to total employment. A gross local product of the current year (GDP): gross
domestic product is an important factor affecting social development and the ecological
environment. Local average slope (AVERSL): the source of the slope data is the DEM spatial
distribution data of China’s altitude from the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Based on
this data, the average slope data of each city is obtained by processing in the ArcGIS10.2
software; the slope is an important environmental factor affecting the construction of HSR.
The higher the slope is, the more complex the HSR construction is. At the same time, the
slope is also an essential factor affecting the spatial distribution of carbon dioxide and
PM2.5. Selecting the slope as the control variable is significant in this paper. The variable
description in this paper is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of variables.

Variables Average S.D Min Max

Ecological Environment Pressure 3.28 0.64 0.88 4.78
Local government service capacity 2.24 3.25 0.05 48.19
Highway traffic passenger volume 7.62 11.83 0.06 165.45
Proportion of industrial employed population 43.84 14.10 4.46 84.4
Gross local product of the current year 1633.26 2574 31.04 33,244.8
Local average slope 2.42 1.97 0.04 11.82

This paper uses the Hausmann test to select random effects and fixed effects. Haus-
mann’s original hypothesis uses random effects. After the Hausmann test, as shown in
Table S3, the test results show that the original hypothesis is rejected. In this paper, fixed
effects are used for regression analysis.

2.3.3. Propensity Score Matching Method

The propensity score matching (PSM) method reduces the influence of data bias
and confounding variables to make a more reasonable comparison between the experi-
mental and control groups [30]. Assuming that there are N individuals, each individual
i (i = 1, 2, . . . , n) in the intervention will have two possible results, corresponding to the
potential results in the non-intervention state and the intervention state, respectively. The
 2.3.3. Propensity Score Matching Method
The propensity score matching (PSM) method reduces the influence of data bias and
confounding variables to make a more reasonable comparison between the experimental
and control groups [30]. Assuming that there are N individuals, each individual i (i =
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 1,2,…, n) in the intervention will have two possible results, corresponding to the potential 7 of 16

results in the non-intervention state and the intervention state, respectively. The effect of
the intervention on an individual is then marked as the difference between the potential
resultsofofthe
effect theintervention
interventiononstate
an and the potential
individual is then results
marked of the non-intervention
as the state, that
difference between the
potential
is: results of the intervention state and the potential results of the non-intervention
state, that is:
(8)
δi δ
=i =
Ci C
(1i (1)
) −−CiC(0i (0)
) (8)
D = 1 means accepting the intervention, that is, the intervention effect of the open-
Dii = 1 means accepting the intervention, that is, the intervention effect of the opening
of Di =D0i means
of HSR;HSR;
ing = 0 means not accepting
not accepting the intervention,
the intervention, that that is, opening
is, not not opening
HSR.HSR.
ThenThen
the
the counterfactual framework can be expressed as the
counterfactual framework can be expressed as the following model: following model:
Ci = (1 − Di )Ci (0) + Di Ci (1) (9)
Ci = (1 − Di )Ci (0) + Di Ci (1) (9)
ATT(x) = E{Ci (1) − Ci (0)|Di = 1, X = x} (10)
ATT(x) = E{Ci (1) − Ci (0)|Di = 1, X = x} (10)
The average treatment effect for the treated (ATT) is used to measure the average
The average
intervention effecttreatment effect forinthe
of an individual thetreated (ATT)state.
intervening is used to measurethe
It represents thedifference
average
intervention effect of an individual in the intervening state. It represents
between the observation result of an individual in the intervening state of the opening ofthe difference
between
HSR andthe its observation
counterfactual,result of an
which is individual in the intervening
called the standard estimator state
of theofaverage
the opening
inter-
of HSR and
vention itsWhen
effect. counterfactual, which isthe
ATT is significant, called the standard
matching effect meets estimator of the average
the expectation.
intervention effect. When ATT is significant, the matching effect meets the expectation.
3. Results
3. Results
3.1. Temporal and Spatial Evolution Characteristics of EEP
3.1. Temporal and Spatial Evolution Characteristics of EEP
According to the formula calculation, the urban ecological environment pressure in
According to the formula calculation, the urban ecological environment pressure in
China is shown in Figure 2. In 2003, the EEP in most study areas was between 2.01–4.00.
China is shown in Figure 2. In 2003, the EEP in most study areas was between 2.01–4.00.
The study areas between 4.01–5.00 were few and scattered; only a few areas had a low
The study areas between 4.01–5.00 were few and scattered; only a few areas had a low EEP.
EEP.eastern
The The eastern
coastalcoastal
areas areas were mainly
were mainly betweenbetween 3.01–4.00.
3.01–4.00. In 2018,In most
2018, research
most research units
units were
were between 0.88–3.00, while the number of research areas between 4.01–5.00
between 0.88–3.00, while the number of research areas between 4.01–5.00 decreased to 0. decreased
to 0.EEP
The TheinEEP in China
China decreased
decreased significantly
significantly duringduring the period
the study study period
from the from the overall
overall layout.
layout.

Figure2.
Figure 2. Spatial
Spatial layout
layout of
of EEP.
EEP.

China’s
China’s HSR
HSR construction
construction experienced
experienced aa period
period of
of rapid
rapid development
development in in 2008.
2008. To
To
further
further study
study the
the impact
impact of
of HSR
HSR onon EEP,
EEP, this
this paper
paper takes
takes 2008
2008 as
as the
the dividing
dividing point
point of
of
research and selects the periods from 2003 to 2008 and 2008 to 2018 for in-depth analysis, as
shown in Figure 3. From 2003 to 2008, the EEP increased in most parts of China, especially
in the eastern and southern regions. From 2008 to 2018, the EEP in most parts of China
decreased. On the one hand, because China attaches great importance to the sustainable
development of the social economy, it has successively issued a series of policies on energy
conservation and emission reduction, alleviating the EEP. On the other hand, with the
change of social production technology, fine production has gradually replaced the rough
production mode. Enterprises reuse industrial waste through technological progress in the
production process of industrial products, reducing the environmental pollution. Overall,
the change of EEP is significant in the two time periods, from the increase of EEP in the first
 cially in the eastern and southern regions. From 2008 to 2018, the EEP in most parts of
China decreased. On the one hand, because China attaches great importance to the sus-
tainable development of the social economy, it has successively issued a series of policies
on energy conservation and emission reduction, alleviating the EEP. On the other hand,
with the change of social production technology, fine production has gradually replaced
Sustainability 2022,
the14, 3152 production mode. Enterprises reuse industrial waste through technological pro-
rough 8 of 16

gress in the production process of industrial products, reducing the environmental pollu-
tion. Overall, the change of EEP is significant in the two time periods, from the increase of
period
EEP in the first period toto the
the decrease
decrease of of
EEPEEP in the
in the second
second period.
period. It also
It also implies
implies thatthat
HSRHSR construction
construction maymay be closely
be closely related
related to EEP,
to EEP, but but
thisthis paper
paper stillstill
needsneeds further
further verification.
verification.

Figure 3. The spatial layout

Figure 3. of
TheEEP changes
spatial in two
layout stages.
of EEP changes in two stages.

3.2.ofImpact
3.2. Impact Analysis Analysis of HSR
HSR Construction on EEPConstruction on EEP
Taking the EEP of Taking the EEP
each study areaof as
each
thestudy area as variable,
explanatory the explanatory variable,
the operation the operation of the
of the
HSR as the explanatory variable, and other variables as the control
HSR as the explanatory variable, and other variables as the control variable., this paper variable., this paper
uses the DID method to study the impact of HSR on EEP. The
uses the DID method to study the impact of HSR on EEP. The specific regression resultsspecific regression results are
shown in Table 3.
are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Regression results of HSR construction on EEP.
Table 3. Regression results of HSR construction on EEP.
Robustness
Var OLS FE Robustness
Var OLS FE Check
EEP Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Check Model 5 Model 6
EEP Model 1 Time − 0.067
Model 2 Model 3 ** − 0.096 ***
Model 4− 0.067 ** −
Model 5 0.104 *** −
Model0.097
6 *** −0.105 **
Treat ×
(0.024) (0.001) (0.013) (0.001) (0.001) (0.031)
−0.067 ** −0.096−*** 0.125−0.067
*** ** −0.104−*** 0.099−0.097
*** −***0.389 ***−0.105 ** ***
−0.117 −0.160 **
Treat×Time GSC
(0.024) (0.000)
(0.001) (0.013) (0.001)(0.001) (0.000)
(0.001) (0.006)
(0.031) (0.016)
0.213 *** 0.013 0.198 *** −0.005 *** 0.232 ***
HTPV
−0.125 *** −0.099 *** −0.389 *** −0.117 ***
(0.000) (0.322) (0.000) −0.160(0.000)
** (0.000)
GSC
(0.000) 0.469 ***
(0.001) 0.298
(0.000) *** 0.659
(0.006) *** (0.016) ***
0.412 0.465 ***
IEPP
(0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)
0.213 *** −0.159 ***0.013 0.198 *** −0.005 0.120
0.079 *** *** *** 0.2320.131
*** *** −0.283 ***
HTPV GDP
(0.000) (0.000)(0.322) (0.000)(0.002) (0.000)(0.000) (0.000)(0.001) (0.000)
−0.084 *** −0.046 *** 0.562 *** −0.032 −0.053 **
0.469AVERSL
*** 0.298 *** 0.659 ***
IEPP (0.000) (0.002)0.412 ***
(0.001) 0.465 (0.825)
*** (0.011)
year
(0.000) N (0.000) Y (0.000) Y (0.000) N (0.000) Y N
id N Y N Y Y N
−0.159 ***
R-squared 0.1010.079 ***0.4940.120 ***0.324 0.131 *** 0.361 −0.283 0.506
*** 0.107
GDP
(0.000)
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05. (0.002) (0.000) (0.001) (0.000)

First, the panel benchmark regression is used in model 1. It can be seen that the
regression coefficient of HSR on EEP is negative and has passed the 5% level significance
test, indicating that the construction of HSR has the effect of alleviating urban EEP. In model
2 and model 5, using two-way fixed effects regression, it can be seen that the regression
coefficient of HSR on EEP is still negative regardless of whether control variables are added
to the equation and has passed the 1% level significance test. In model 3, model 4, and
model 5, the time fixed effects, individual fixed effects and two-way fixed effects regression
are adopted, respectively. The varied range of the regression coefficient of HSR on EEP
is low. According to the regression results of models 2–5, the regression result of HSR on
EEP is relatively stable. The complete regression results show that GSC will significantly
 Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 9 of 16

reduce the EEP; IEPP will significantly increase the EEP, and the higher the regional GDP,
the greater the EEP.
The test results of similar trend terms of the DID method are shown in Table 4. Before
the operations of HSR, the EEP mainly increased in the three phases. After the opening of
HSR, the EEP decreases and is significant at the level of 5%. During the opening period
and the three phases after the opening of the HSR, the EEP tends to decrease, with a high
degree of significance, and the test results of the balance trend item pass. To further verify
the robustness of the regression results of the DID method, the PSM is used to regress
the data again. When processing the data, mixed matching is used. The matching results
are shown in Figure 4 (GSC: local government service capacity. HTPV: highway traffic
passenger volume. IEPP: proportion of industrial employed population. GDP: gross local
product of the current year) and Figure 5.

Table 4. Parallel trend term test.

EEP C Std.Err. p
_D_F3 0.004 0.053 0.946
_D_F2 0.050 0.050 0.323
_D_F1 0.062 0.042 0.151
HSR −0.077 ** 0.032 0.017
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW _D_L1 −0.069 * 0.042 0.010
_D_L2 −0.052 0.034 0.124
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW _D_L3 −0.117 ** 0.046 0.012
Parallel Trend—‘leads’ Prob > F = 0.3386 (RESULT: ‘Parallel-trend’ passed)
** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.

Figure 4. Standardized deviation diagram of variables.

Figure
Figure 4. Standardized deviation
4. Standardized diagram ofdiagram
deviation variables.
of variables.

Figure
Figure Common
5. 5. value value
Common range diagram
range ofdiagram
propensityofscore.
propensity
score.
Figure 5. Common value range diagram of propensity score.
The results of matching variables show that the standardized deviatio
after The resultsisof
matching matching
less variables
than 10%, show
and most that thevalues
observed standardized deviatio
are within the c
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 10 of 16

The results of matching variables show that the standardized deviation of variables
after matching is less than 10%, and most observed values are within the common value
range, so a low sample size will not be lost in tendency score matching. At the same time,
after calculation, T (ATT) = −2.26 in propensity score matching, which is significant at
the 5% level, which shows that the matching effect is good. The non-equilibrium panel
regression is conducted again for the matched samples. The regression results are shown
in model 6 in Table 3. The regression coefficient of HSR on EEP is negative and has passed
the 5% significance level test, which again shows that the dual differential regression result
is robust.

3.3. Heterogeneity Analysis of HSR on EEP

Due to the significant differences in resource endowments in various regions of China,
we further study the impact of the operations of HSR in eastern, central and western regions
of China on EEP (Table 5). Model 7, model 8 and model 9 represent the regression results
of the impact of HSR operations on EEP in the eastern region, the central region and the
western region, respectively. The HSR in the eastern and central regions affects the EEP.
The regression coefficients are −0.082 and −0.103, respectively, passing the 5% significance
level test. It shows that the opening of HSR in eastern and central China will significantly
reduce the pressure on the ecological environment. In the western region, the impact of
HSR on EEP is positive and not significant. On the one hand, due to the late construction of
HSR in the west, the HSR has not fully played its role. At the same time, the construction of
HSR is mainly concentrated in eastern and central China. The density of HSR construction
in the west is low, the mitigation effect of HSR on the western EEP is not apparent, and the
economy in the west is still facing the pressure of transformation. On the other hand, there
are many missing data and few HSR stations in the western region, resulting in fewer data
in the processing group of the research unit in the western region, which interferes with
the regression results to a certain extent.

Table 5. Heterogeneity analysis of HSR on EEP.

Var Location Heterogeneity Industrial Heterogeneity

EEP Model 7 Model 8 Model 9 Model 10 Model 11 Model 12
−0.082 ** −0.103 ** 0.069 −0.103 *** −0.075 −0.266 ***
Treat × Time
(0.049) (0.044) (0.388) (0.009) (0.215) (0.003)
−0.067 −0.122 * −0.210 *** −0.017 −0.164 ** 0.350 ***
GSC
(0.355) (0.089) (0.010) (0.795) (0.048) (0.001)
−0.009 −0.035 0.024 −0.021 −0.008 −0.043
HTPV
(0.718) (0.302) (0.272) (0.411) (0.780) (0.324)
0.683 *** 0.116 0.513 *** 0.497 *** 0.176 * 0.119
IEPP
(0.000) (0.155) (0.000) (0.000) (0.100) (0.368)
0.083 −0.028 0.216 *** 0.05 0.124 0.081
GDP
(0.122) (0.728) (0.004) (0.353) (0.129) (0.421)
10.98 ** 25.1 *** −0.137 9.382 ** −0.834 3.042
AVERSL
(0.013) (0.005) (0.403) (0.035) (0.269) (0.391)
year Y Y Y Y Y Y
id Y Y Y Y Y Y
R-squared 0.508 0.520 0.529 0.533 0.4406 0.476
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.

Different regions have different resource endowment conditions and development

characteristics in different areas. China’s State Council defines “resource-based cities” and
promoting the sustainable development of resource-based areas as a significant strategic
issue for developing countries, as well as a worldwide problem [31]. First, the State Council
of China has set the three indicators of industrial structure, employment structure, and
resource market share, and cities that meet one of them are considered to be mining cities.
Secondly, the two indicators of forest resource potential and resource development capacity
are set, and cities that meet these two indicators are regarded as “forest-industry” cities.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 11 of 16

Based on the quantitative definition, 262 resource-based cities (counties) were defined by
comprehensively considering cities with a long history of resource development and the
distribution of national key resource-based enterprises.
In order to study the impact of HSR operation on resource-based cities, this pa-
per divides 284 research units into non-resource-based cities and resource-based cities
for regression. The research area of this paper has a total of 284 research units, includ-
ing 114 resource-based cities and 170 non-resource-based cities. Since there are few HSR
stations in western areas, in order to make the regression more accurate, the western
data are excluded from the regression. The regression results of non-resource-based and
resource-based areas are shown in model 10 and model 11. The operations of HSR in
non-resource-based cities will reduce the pressure on the ecological environment. Beijing,
Shanghai, Guangzhou and other non-resource-based areas have a very developed econ-
omy and rely on their particular geographical advantages to develop new industries. The
development of HSR will promote these cities to transfer high pollution and high loss
industries to the surrounding second and third-tier cities to reduce the EEP in this region.
For resource-based cities, HSR operation does not significantly reduce the pressure on the
ecological environment. Since the resource-based cities in the sample selected in this paper
are mainly distributed in Central China, this paper uses the data of central China to further
explore the impact of HSR operations on EEP. The regression results are shown in model 12.
In the central region, the HSR operation has a significant effect on alleviating the EEP. The
economy of the most resource-based sites is underdeveloped, there are many traditional
industries, the industrial structure is ageing, and the economic transformation is facing
significant pressure. The operation of HSR will promote the transfer of high-tech in central
cities to resource-based cities and then provide power for the industrial transformation of
resource-based cities.

3.4. Analysis on the Impact Mechanism of HSR Operation on EEP

The degree of industrial transformation (DIT) and degree of employment transforma-
tion (DET) [32,33] are important driving factors for ecological environment improvement.
Therefore, we further analyze the impact of the interaction effect of HSR operations, in-
dustrial transformation and employment transformation on EEP. The interaction items
of industrial transformation degree, employment transformation degree and HSR opera-
tions are established to further reveal the common impact mechanism of HSR operations,
industrial structure and employment structure on EEP. The regression results are shown
in Table 6.

Table 6. Regression results of the impact mechanism of HSR operation on EEP.

Var Benchmark Regression

EEP Model 13 Model 14
−0.004 **
Treat × Time × DET
(0.034)
−0.005 **
Treat × Time × DIT
(0.050)
−0.037 −0.153 ***
Treat × Time
(0.243) (0.000)
−0.012 ***
DET
(0.000)
−0.041 ***
DIT
(0.000)
Control Variable Y Y
year Y Y
id Y Y
R-squared 0.679 0.501
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 12 of 16

The regression coefficient of the interaction between HSR operation and industrial
transformation for EEP is −0.005 and passes the 5% significance level test. At the same
time, the regression coefficient of the interaction between HSR operation and employment
transformation for EEP is −0.004 and passes the 1% significance level test. It shows
that industrial transformation and upgrading and optimization of employment structure,
combined with the implementation of HSR construction policy, can significantly reduce
the EEP. The synergy or interaction between industrial transformation and upgrading,
employment structure optimization and HSR construction policies has significantly reduced
the EEP to varying degrees [34]. The operation of HSR has promoted the adjustment of
employment structure and industrial upgrading and promoted the improvement of urban
functions. In the process of HSR operation, the spatial agglomeration of industries and
production factors is formed through the investment needs of the HSR industry itself. It is
conducive to the industrial transformation and employment of the working population and
improves the environmental benefits of production enterprises. Moreover, it is conducive
to the industrial transformation and employment of the working population and improves
the environmental benefits of production enterprises [35]. The most direct impact of the
opening and operation of the HSR is accelerating the rapid transfer of production factors
and increasing passenger traffic. The increase in passenger traffic will increase the number
of passengers in the region, and passengers will inevitably consume resources locally.
This consumption behavior will stimulate the development of local tourism, catering,
accommodation and other service industries and reduce the region’s dependence on high-
pollution, low-value-added industries [36].

4. Discussion
4.1. Analysis on the Impact of HSR Operation on EEP
HSR construction has become a hot topic in global economic development in recent
years. Some scholars at home and abroad are paying more and more attention to the
research on the impact of HSR development on industrial development, regional economic
development, and urban planning [7,11]. The existing research on HSR is mainly based
on the speed of HSR and studies the economic utility of the opening of HSR [37]. The
opening of HSR will strengthen the time and space connection between cities of different
scales and attract the advantages of the surrounding areas to the central city. The research
on the impact of HSR on industrial development uses social survey and measurement
methods and takes specific industries as research objects, such as tourism and industry.
Other scholars research social employment and transportation spatial accessibility through
geospatial technologies. With the increasing attention to the ecological environment in the
world, the governments of various regions tend to prioritise the sustainable development
of the local society and economy.
Scholars usually evaluate the changes in the natural living environment after the
completion of HSR by measuring the number of resources or environmental pollution
factors, such as the area of arable land, air quality or pollutant emissions. As people begin
to pay attention to the impact of social and economic factors on the environment, industrial
transformation and employment transformation have also become important factors in
evaluating the natural environment. Traditional methods mainly focus on exploring the
relationship between HSR and environmental ecology from the perspective of a single
indicator. This paper explores the relationship between HSR operation and the overall
ecological environment from a macro perspective. In this study, firstly, we used the AHP-
TOPSIS model to evaluate EEP and build a more substantial eco-environmental index
evaluation system, including multi-dimensional indicators. Then, from the perspective of
geography, the evaluation results of TOPSIS were presented in geographical space, making
the measurement results of EEP more vivid and intuitive. We built the DID model and
tested its robustness with the PSM method. Through the measurement results of these
two main policy evaluation models, we scientifically confirmed that the operation of HSR
can effectively reduce the overall ecological and environmental pressure, which further
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 13 of 16

enriched the research on the impact of HSR on environmental and ecological quality. By
solving the research problems of this study, we systematically integrated a series of problem-
solving models and methods to explain the relationship between HSR and EEP better and to
realize multi-disciplinary integration, including geography, statistics, economics, sociology
and ecology.

4.2. Analysis on the Impact Mechanism of HSR Operation on EEP

In order to improve the ecological environment and promote the sustainable develop-
ment of the social economy, the following policy suggestions are put forward according to
the research conclusions, which follow below.
Firstly, the construction of HSR should be fully incorporated into the city’s future
development plan. The rapid urbanization process will significantly impact the fragile
ecological environment of a developing country. The considerable population pressure,
increasingly scarce resources and the deterioration of environmental quality have become
constraints to urban development [38]. The rapid development of urbanization in the world,
as a particular ecosystem, plays a significant role in promoting economic development and
social progress and continues to have serious environmental problems. The construction
of HSR can effectively alleviate the pressure of the urban ecological environment and is
an effective way for cities to achieve sustainable development [39]. The local government
shall fully evaluate the necessity of HSR construction according to the urban development
stage and development characteristics. The government management departments of cities
meeting the conditions for HSR construction should fully consider the introduction of HSR
in formulating long-term urban development plans and appropriately reserve the land for
HSR construction in land planning.
Secondly, the construction of HSR in the central and western regions needs to be
accelerated. Due to the low level of social and economic development in the western
region and the low density of HSR construction in the western region, the role of HSR
in alleviating the pressure on the ecological environment in the western region has not
appeared. At the same time, the central and western regions are rich in mineral resources.
Most of the resource-based cities designated in China are distributed in the central and
western regions. The secondary industry dominates economic development, and the ter-
tiary industry is not developed. The economy of the central and western regions is still
under the pressure of transformation. The central and western regions should improve the
construction of HSR infrastructure and formulate long-term development plans [31]. While
implementing HSR construction, the government sector should also cultivate and expand
high-tech industrial agglomeration and optimize the employment structure. According to
the resource endowment of different regions, the focus should be on green industry brands,
public services and characteristic industries, and improvement of the ecological protection
positioning of different regions should be pursued. Give full play to the HSR operation’s
environmental and ecological benefits, and strive to build a “high-tech industry sector” led
by “green homes”. At the same time, the transportation planning department will vigor-
ously implement the strategy of building an ecologically vital city and promote ecological
governance, environmental protection and comprehensive utilization and development of
green resources along the HSR.
Finally, due to the different economic development conditions and natural environ-
mental conditions of different cities, HSR construction is not suitable for all regions. HSR
construction should be adapted to local conditions and significant economic development
initiatives. It will also improve the local natural ecological environment through industrial
transformation and employment transformation. Cities with large passenger flows should
seriously consider incorporating HSR into future urban planning. However, for cities
whose current conditions are not suitable for HSR development at present, economic devel-
opment can be reduced by delineating high-tech industrial parks and attracting high-tech
industries to reduce the pressure on the ecological environment and achieve sustainable
social development. At the same time, other modes of sustainable transport, such as electric
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 14 of 16

vehicles [40] and environmentally friendly hybrid vehicles [41], may be integrated into the
public transport system to reduce the ecological environmental pressure.

5. Conclusions
Currently, the problem of degradation of the ecological environment has gradually
become an important factor restricting the sustainable development of society. In rapid
urbanization, it is essential to protect the ecological environment effectively. We are fully
aware of the important role of HSR construction in alleviating pressures on the ecological
environment. Based on the panel data of 284 cities in China from 2003 to 2018, we have
constructed an EEP evaluation that evaluates the EEP of different areas according to the
TOPSIS model and uses spatial analysis tools to explore the temporal and spatial evolution
characteristics of EEP. Then, based on the DID and PSM methods, we have quantitatively
calculated the impact effect of HSR operations on EEP and analyzed the action mechanism
of HSR operations on EEP combined with the analysis of the interaction between the DIT,
DET and the operations of HSR.
During the study period, the EEP in China decreased significantly. HSR in the eastern
and central regions played a significant role in reducing the EEP. However, due to the small
number of HSR stations in the western region, HSR did not play a significant role, and the
effect is not apparent. For resource-based cities, the HSR operation has a significant effect on
alleviating the EEP. in the central region. Through the analysis of the action mechanism of
HSR on EEP, it can be seen that the synergy or interaction between industrial transformation
and upgrading, employment structure optimization and HSR construction policies can
significantly reduce the EEP to varying degrees. Industrial transformation and upgrading
and employment structure optimization, combined with HSR construction policies, can
significantly reduce the EEP. The research in this article shows that the operation of HSR will
reduce the pressure on the ecological environment and make relevant recommendations.
However, the protection of the ecological environment requires effective measures from
multiple angles.
The results of this study, combined with other research results, also show that HSR
can improve a single ecological environmental indicator, reduce the pressure on the eco-
logical environment, and improve the overall quality of the ecological environment. The
construction of evaluation indicators is essential for the current comprehensive evaluation.
Therefore, subsequent research will be carried out from the perspective of optimizing the
index system. At the same time, some ecological environment indicators are related to the
atmospheric environment in reality, and ocean currents, monsoons, and rainfall will also
affect some single indicator performance in selected study areas. The causes of ecological
damage and environmental pollution are complex and particular. It is challenging to
achieve systematic and effective governance with a single discipline, single technology
and single method. It is necessary to continue to increase the innovation of ecological
and environmental protection technologies while attaching great importance to promoting
related technologies. The association and integration of technology innovation, industrial
innovation, and business model innovation will promote the accelerated development of
energy-saving, resource recycling, and environmental protection.

Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://
www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su14063152/s1, Table S1: The five experts’ scoring sheet on a single
indicator; Table S2: Index importance degree comparison assignment; Table S3: Hausman model test.
Author Contributions: C.J. initiated this study with an original idea, conducted the overall analysis
and wrote this article. X.L. provided very professional theoretical guidance and extremely important
suggestions of improvement for the overall analysis. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 15 of 16

Data Availability Statement: There are two sources of HSR data: the HSR data before 1 October
2015 comes from the State Railway Administration of China (http://www.nra.gov.cn/ (accessed on
14 July 2021)), and the data after 1 October 2015 comes from the State Railway Administration of
China, the China Railway 12306 website (https://www.12306.cn/index/ (accessed on 14 July 2021)),
and local government website. The carbon dioxide emission and PM2.5 data were collected from
http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5136302.v2 (accessed on 5 July 2021) and http://fizz.phys.
dal.ca/~atmos/martin/?page_id=140 (accessed on 1 March 2021); Local average slope data were
collected from https://www.resdc.cn/data.aspx?DATAID=217 (accessed on 5 July 2021). Other
indexs and variables are from the China Urban Statistical Yearbook (2004–2019) (https://data.cnki.
net/yearbook/Single/N2021050059 (accessed on 5 July 2021)).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hong, K.M. A Study on the Industrial Design Direction by the Near-Future Civilized Society. J. Cult. Prod. Des. 2021, 65, 93–104.
2. Mohring, H. Optimization and scale economies in urban bus transportation. Am. Econ. Rev. 1972, 62, 591–604.
3. Jerrett, M. Atmospheric science: The death toll from air-pollution sources. Nature 2015, 525, 330–331. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Sun, W.D.; Chen, Z.G.; Wang, D.Y. Can Land Marketization Help Reduce Industrial Pollution? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health
2019, 16, 2213. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Zhang, X.-P.; Hu, Z.-H.; Wei, X.-J.; Huang, Y.-W. Study on Identification of Key Areas for Ecological Protection and Restoration in
Resource-exhausted Region: Take Dayu County, Jiangxi as an Example. J. Ecol. Rural Environ. 2021, 37, 1031–1040.
6. Dai, X.H.; Li, W.C. Impact of Education, Medical Services, and Living Conditions on Health: Evidence from China Health and
Nutrition Survey. Healthcare 2021, 9, 1122. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Nickelsburg, J.; Ahluwalia, S.; Yang, Y. High-speed Rail, Urbanisation, and Housing Affordability Evidence from the Shinkansen
System. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 2020, 54, 267–288.
8. Giannakos, K. Comparison of Magnitude of Actions on Track in High-Speed and Heavy-Haul Railroads Influence of Resilient
Fastenings. Transp. Res. Rec. 2012, 2289, 70–77. [CrossRef]
9. Dalkic, G.; Balaban, O.; Tuydes-Yaman, H.; Celikkol-Kocak, T. An assessment of the CO2 emissions reduction in high speed rail
lines: Two case studies from Turkey. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 165, 746–761. [CrossRef]
10. Kaewunruen, S.; Sresakoolchai, J.; Peng, J.Y. Life Cycle Cost, Energy and Carbon Assessments of Beijing-Shanghai High-Speed
Railway. Sustainability 2020, 12, 206. [CrossRef]
11. Scott, A.J. World development report 2009: Reshaping economic geography. World Environ. 2008, 9, 1269–1277. [CrossRef]
12. Sasaki, K.; Ohashi, T.; Ando, A. High-speed rail transit impact on regional systems: Does the Shinkansen contribute to dispersion?
Ann. Reg. Sci. 1997, 31, 77–98. [CrossRef]
13. Murakami, J.; Cervero, R. California high-speed rail and economic development: Station-area market profiles and public policy
responses. In Symposium in University of California, Berkeley Faculty Club; University of California: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010.
14. Chen, Z.H.; Xue, J.B.; Rose, A.Z.; Haynes, K.E. The impact of high-speed rail investment on economic and environmental change
in China: A dynamic CGE analysis. Transp. Res. Part A-Policy Pract. 2016, 92, 232–245. [CrossRef]
15. Liu, K.; Lin, B.Q. Research on influencing factors of environmental pollution in China: A spatial econometric analysis. J. Clean.
Prod. 2019, 206, 356–364. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, Q.W.; Chiu, Y.H.; Chiu, C.R. Driving factors behind carbon dioxide emissions in China: A modified production-theoretical
decomposition analysis. Energy Econ. 2015, 51, 252–260. [CrossRef]
17. Chen, K.L.; Liu, X.Q.; Ding, L.; Huang, G.Z.; Li, Z.G. Spatial Characteristics and Driving Factors of Provincial Wastewater
Discharge in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 1221. [CrossRef]
18. Chen, J.Q.; Guo, Y.S.; Su, H.N.; Ma, X.J.; Zhang, Z.Y.; Chang, B.S. Empirical analysis of energy consumption transfer in China’s national
economy from the perspective of production and demand. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 19202–19221. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Dong, F.; Yu, B.L.; Pan, Y.L. Examining the synergistic effect of CO2 emissions on PM2.5 emissions reduction: Evidence from
China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 223, 759–771. [CrossRef]
20. Li, X.F.; Cheng, B.D.; Hong, Q.L.; Xu, C. Can a Win-Win Situation of Economy and Environment Be Achieved in Cities by the
Government’s Environmental Regulations? Sustainability 2021, 13, 5829. [CrossRef]
21. Wang, J.N.; Yin, P.Z.; Li, D.J.; Zheng, G.Q.; Sun, B.J. Quantitative Relationship between Urban Green Canopy Area and Urban
Greening Land Area. J. Urban Plan. Dev. 2021, 147, 05021016. [CrossRef]
22. Song, J.H.; Cui, S.; Han, Q.; Li, P.; Zhang, Q.K.; Li, M.R.; Jiang, C.J. Biochemical Treatment of Municipal Sewage in Northeast China
in Winter. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Advances in Energy Resources and Environment Engineering
(ICAESEE), Chengdu, China, 7–9 December 2018.
23. Hou, J.; Teo, T.S.H.; Zhou, F.L.; Lim, M.K.; Chen, H. Does industrial green transformation successfully facilitate a decrease in
carbon intensity in China? An environmental regulation perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 1060–1071. [CrossRef]
24. Chen, J.; Gao, M.; Cheng, S.; Hou, W.; Song, M.; Liu, X.; Liu, Y.; Shan, Y. County-level CO2 emissions and sequestration in China
during 1997–2017. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 391. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 3152 16 of 16

25. Cui, D.H.; Zhang, X.Y. Application of Gray Analytic Hierarchy Process in Project Risk Evaluation. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computational Intelligence, Shanghai, China, 7–8 November 2009; pp. 592–594.
26. Elhassouny, A.; Smarandache, F. Neutrosophic-simplified-TOPSIS Multi-Criteria Decision-Making using combined Simplified-TOPSIS
method and Neutrosophics. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE) Held as Part of
IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (IEEE WCCI), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 24–29 July 2016; pp. 2468–2474.
27. Yang, T.; Zhang, Q.; Wan, X.H.; Li, X.P.; Wang, Y.Y.; Wang, W. Comprehensive ecological risk assessment for semi-arid basin based
on conceptual model of risk response and improved TOPSIS model-a case study of Wei River Basin, China. Sci. Total Environ.
2020, 719, 137502. [CrossRef]
28. Li, J.; Jia, L.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Jiang, N. Measuring model of rural transformation development path in Fuping County of
Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Habitat Int. 2018, 74, 48–56. [CrossRef]
29. Caniglia, E.C.; Murray, E.J. Difference-in-Difference in the Time of Cholera: A Gentle Introduction for Epidemiologists. Curr.
Epidemiol. Rep. 2020, 7, 203–211. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. Hu, K.; Shi, D.Q. The impact of government-enterprise collusion on environmental pollution in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2021,
292, 112744. [CrossRef]
31. Li, Q.Y.; Zeng, F.E.; Liu, S.H.; Yang, M.A.; Xu, F. The effects of China’s sustainable development policy for resource-based cities on
local industrial transformation. Resour. Policy 2021, 71, 101940. [CrossRef]
32. Song, Y.M. Research on industrial transformation and upgrading based on low-carbon economic environment. Fresenius Environ.
Bull. 2021, 30, 6988–6995.
33. Guo, W.; Dai, H.J.; Liu, X.R. Impact of different types of environmental regulation on employment scale: An analysis based on
perspective of provincial heterogeneity. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 45699–45711. [CrossRef]
34. Wang, C.Y.; Meng, W.D.; Hou, X.S. The impact of high-speed rails on urban economy: An investigation using night lighting data
of Chinese cities. Res. Transp. Econ. 2020, 80, 100819. [CrossRef]
35. Li, X.; Ma, X.D. Impacts of high-speed rail development on urban land expansion and utilization intensity in China. J. Transp.
Land Use 2021, 14, 583–601. [CrossRef]
36. Zhou, B.; Wen, Z.H.; Yang, Y. Agglomerating or dispersing? Spatial effects of high-speed trains on regional tourism economies.
Tour. Manag. 2021, 87, 104392. [CrossRef]
37. Albalate, D.; Bel, G. (Eds.) Evaluating High-Speed Rail: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 1st ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2016.
38. Li, J.; Jiang, C.; Xing, Z. Multi-dimensional influence measurement of urbanization on the quality of natural living environment
in China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 12151–12168. [CrossRef]
39. David, B.; Peter, H.; Stephen, M. High-Speed Rail Shrinking Spaces, Shaping Places. Built Environ. 2013, 39, 321–323.
40. Agaton, C.B.; Collera, A.A.; Guno, C.S. Socio-Economic and Environmental Analyses of Sustainable Public Transport in the
Philippines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4720. [CrossRef]
41. Cartenì, A.; Henke, I.; Molitierno, C.; di Francesco, L. Strong Sustainability in Public Transport Policies: An e-Mobility Bus Fleet
Application in Sorrento Peninsula (Italy). Sustainability 2020, 12, 7033. [CrossRef]