Calculation of the contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology based on a feedforward neural network

English version

Autoři: Rongrong Xu ^aff001; Yongxiang Wu ^aff001; Ming Chen ^aff001; Xuan Zhang ^aff003; Wei Wu ^aff001; Long Tan ^aff004; Gaoxu Wang ^aff001; Yi Xu ^aff001; Bing Yan ^aff001; Yuedong Xia ^aff005
Působiště autorů: Hydrology and Water Resources Department, Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Nanjing, China ^aff001; State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineer, Nanjing, China ^aff002; Hydrology and Water Resources College, Hohai University, Nanjing, China ^aff003; Sina Com Technology (China) Co. LTD, Beijing, China ^aff004; Water Conservancy Bureau of Pinghu, Jiaxing, China ^aff005
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(9)
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222091

Souhrn

Quantitative analysis of the contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology and analysis of the underlying reasons behind changes provide an important foundation upon which the government can formulate water policies. This paper abandons the assumption of a scale economy and separates the changes of benefits brought about by the scale from scientific and technological progress, thus changing the C-D production function from linear to nonlinear. Based on a feedforward neural network, it calculates the coefficient of the output elasticity, the economic contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology and the scale economies for each year using relevant data from 1981 to 2016. The results show that (1) the average contribution rate of capital investment from 1981 to 2016 was 47.3%, and the average contribution rate of labor from 1981 to 2016 was 9.1%. It is not obvious that the significant increase in the labor force has contributed to the growth of China’s water conservancy industry. (2) The average contribution rate of scale economies in 1981–2016 was 26.7%, and the contribution rate of scale economies is negatively correlated with the capital contribution rate. (3) The average contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology was 43.6% from 1981 to 2016, and the average contribution rate of the total factor productivity after removing scale economies from 1981 to 2016 was 16.9%. During the period of the 6th Five-Year Plan(1981~1985), the contribution rate of water conservancy science and technology was relatively high. Since that time, it has remained at 40%. In recent years, as water conservancy reforms in key areas have made positive progress, scientific and technological progress has increased the growth of water conservancy benefits annually.

Klíčová slova:

Biology and life sciences – Neuroscience – Social sciences – People and places – Computer and information sciences – Geographical locations – Economics – Earth sciences – Ecology and environmental sciences – Natural resources – Water resources – Neural networks – Asia – China – Hydrology – Flooding – Conservation science – Macroeconomics – Production functions – Feedforward neural networks

Zdroje

1. Sun S, Fang C, Lv J (2017) Spatial inequality of water footprint in China: a detailed decomposition of inequality from water use types and drivers. Journal of Hydrology 553.

2. Zheng SL, Ren-Hai WU, Wen-Gang R (2010) A Tentative Inquiry into Indicator System of Planning EIA Based on Low Carbon and Circular Economy. Environmental Science & Technology 33: 199–204.

3. Du K, Lin B (2017) International comparison of total-factor energy productivity growth: A parametric Malmquist index approach. Energy 118: 481–488.

4. Long X, Zhao X, Cheng F (2015) The comparison analysis of total factor productivity and eco-efficiency in China’s cement manufactures. Energy Policy 81: 61–66.

5. Wu CS, Yang SL, Lei YP (2012) Quantifying the anthropogenic and climatic impacts on water discharge and sediment load in the Pearl River (Zhujiang), China (1954–2009). Journal of Hydrology 452–453: 190–204.

6. Molinos-Senante M, Maziotis A, Sala-Garrido R (2017) Assessment of the Total Factor Productivity Change in the English and Welsh Water Industry: a Färe-Primont Productivity Index Approach. Water Resources Management 31: 2389–2405.

7. Tang D, Tang J, Zheng X, Ma T, Bethel BJ (2017) Environmental regulation efficiency and total factor productivity—Effect analysis based on Chinese data from 2003 to 2013. Ecological Indicators 73: 312–318.

8. Zhao X, Liu C, Yang M (2018) The effects of environmental regulation on China’s total factor productivity: An empirical study of carbon-intensive industries. Journal of Cleaner Production 179: 325–334.

9. Jia S, Long Q, Wang RY, Yan J, Kang D (2016) On the Inapplicability of the Cobb-Douglas Production Function for Estimating the Benefit of Water Use and the Value of Water Resources. Water Resources Management 30: 3645–3650.

10. Burda MC, Severgnini B (2014) Solow residuals without capital stocks. Journal of Development Economics 109: 154–171.

11. Asmild M, Baležentis T, Hougaard JL (2016) Multi-directional productivity change: MEA-Malmquist. Journal of Productivity Analysis 46: 109–119.

12. Wang Q, Su B, Sun J, Peng Z, Zhou D (2015) Measurement and decomposition of energy-saving and emissions reduction performance in Chinese cities. Applied Energy 151: 85–92.

13. Cobb CW, Douglas PH (1928) A Theory of Production. American Economic Review 18: 139–165.

14. Abramovitz M (1956) Thinking about growth: Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870. Nber Chapters 46: 5–23.

15. Solow RM (1957) TECHNICAL CHANGE AND THE AGGREGATE PRODUCTION FUNCTION. Review of Economics & Statistics 39: 554–562.

16. Jorgenson DW, Griliches Z (1967) The Explanation of Productivity Change. Review of Economic Studies 34: 249–283.

17. Romer PM (1987) Growth Based on Increasing Returns Due to Specialization. American Economic Review 77: 56–62.

18. Romer PM (1989) Endogenous Technological Change. Nber Working Papers 98: 71–102.

19. Lucas RE (1999) On the mechanics of economic development. Quantitative Macroeconomics Working Papers 22: 3–42.

20. Wu S, Li B, Nie Q, Chen C (2017) Government expenditure, corruption and total factor productivity. Journal of cleaner production 168: 279–289.

21. Christiano LJ, Eichenbaum MS, Trabandt M (2015) Understanding the great recession. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 7: 110–167.

22. Feng C, Wang M, Liu G, Huang J (2017) Sources of economic growth in China from 2000–2013 and its further sustainable growth path: A three-hierarchy meta-frontier data envelopment analysis. Economic Modelling 64: 334–348.

23. Yuan B, Xiang Q (2018) Environmental regulation, industrial innovation and green development of Chinese manufacturing: Based on an extended CDM model. Journal of cleaner production 176: 895–908.

24. Zhong Z, Hu Y, Jiang L (2019) Impact of Climate Change on Agricultural Total Factor Productivity Based on Spatial Panel Data Model: Evidence from China. Sustainability 11: 1516.

25. Moore FC, Diaz DB (2015) Temperature impacts on economic growth warrant stringent mitigation policy. Nature Climate Change 5: 127.

26. Dellink R, Chateau J, Lanzi E, Magn E B (2017) Long-term economic growth projections in the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Global Environmental Change 42: 200–214.

27. Zhang N, Zhou P, Kung C (2015) Total-factor carbon emission performance of the Chinese transportation industry: A bootstrapped non-radial Malmquist index analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 41: 584–593.

28. Amri F (2018) Carbon dioxide emissions, total factor productivity, ICT, trade, financial development, and energy consumption: testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Tunisia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25: 33691–33701. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3331-1 30276690

29. Li W, Wang W, Yu W, Ali M (2018) Historical growth in total factor carbon productivity of the Chinese industry—a comprehensive analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 170: 471–485.

30. Fan M, Shao S, Yang L (2015) Combining global Malmquist—Luenberger index and generalized method of moments to investigate industrial total factor CO2 emission performance: a case of Shanghai (China). Energy Policy 79: 189–201.

31. Xin B, Sun M (2018) A differential oligopoly game for optimal production planning and water savings. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH 269: 206–217.

32. Xin B, Li Y (2013) Bifurcation and Chaos in a Price Game of Irrigation Water in a Coastal Irrigation District. DISCRETE DYNAMICS IN NATURE AND SOCIETY.

33. Ackerberg DA, Caves K, Frazer G (2015) Identification properties of recent production function estimators. Econometrica 83: 2411–2451.

34. Molinos-Senante M, Sala-Garrido R, Hernández-Sancho F (2016) Development and application of the Hicks-Moorsteen productivity index for the total factor productivity assessment of wastewater treatment plants. Journal of Cleaner Production 112: 3116–3123.

35. Li B, Wu S (2016) Effects of local and civil environmental regulation on green total factor productivity in China: A spatial Durbin econometric analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production 153: S1991399945.

36. Kong D, Yuan R (2010) The contribution rate of solow model to water conservancy science and technology. Science & Technology and Economy 23: 59–62.

37. Yuan R, Kong D (2009) Measurement of contribution rate of hydraulic Science and technology in 30 years of China’s reform and opening up. Forum on Science and Technology in China: 20–24.

38. Hossain MM, Basak T, Majumder AK (2013) Application of Non-Linear Cobb-Douglas Production Function with Autocorrelation Problem to Selected Manufacturing Industries in Bangladesh. Open Journal of Statistics 333019: 173–178.

39. Asche F, Guttormsen AG, Nielsen R (2013) Future challenges for the maturing Norwegian salmon aquaculture industry: An analysis of total factor productivity change from 1996 to 2008. Aquaculture 396: 43–50.

40. Balk BM (2014) Measuring and Relating Aggregate and Subaggregate Productivity Change Without Neoclassical Assumptions. Statistica Neerlandica 69: 21–48.

41. Byerlee D, Murgai R (2015) Sense and sustainability revisited: the limits of total factor productivity measures of sustainable agricultural systems. Agricultural Economics 26: 227–236.

42. Antoci A, Borghesi S, Sodini M (2017) Water resource use and competition in an evolutionary model. Water Resources Management 31: 2523–2543.

43. Zha D, Zhou D (2014) The elasticity of substitution and the way of nesting CES production function with emphasis on energy input. Applied energy 130: 793–798.

44. Lu H, Xie H, He Y, Wu Z, Zhang X (2018) Assessing the impacts of land fragmentation and plot size on yields and costs: A translog production model and cost function approach. Agricultural Systems 161: 81–88.

45. Shan ZG, Yan P (2010) Management of rock bursts during excavation of the deep tunnels in Jinping II Hydropower Station. Bulletin of Engineering Geology & the Environment 69: 353–363.

46. Al-Saidi Mohammad (2017) Conflicts and security in integrated water resources management. Environmental Science & Policy 73: 38–44.

47. Wang X, Shang S, Yang W, Clary CR, Yang D (2010) Simulation of land use—soil interactive effects on water and sediment yields at watershed scale. Ecological Engineering 36: 328–344.

48. Yüksel I (2010) Hydropower for sustainable water and energy development. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 14: 462–469.

49. Qiang Z, Zhang W, Chen YD, Jiang T (2011) Flood, drought and typhoon disasters during the last half-century in the Guangdong province, China. Natural Hazards 57: 267–278.

50. He Z, Yen GG, Zhang J (2014) Fuzzy-Based Pareto Optimality for Many-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 18: 269–285.

51. Tang D, Tang J, Xiao Z, Ma T, Bethel BJ (2017) Environmental regulation efficiency and total factor productivity—Effect analysis based on Chinese data from 2003 to 2013. Ecological Indicators 73: 312–318.

52. Shao S, Luan R, Yang Z, Li C (2016) Does directed technological change get greener: Empirical evidence from Shanghai\”s industrial green development transformation. Ecological Indicators 69: 758–770.

Calculation of the contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology based on a feedforward neural network

Souhrn

Klíčová slova:

Zdroje

PLOS One

Aktuální možnosti diagnostiky a léčby litiáz