Search

• Environmental regulations can improve energy-environment efficiency of firms. • Environmental policies have asymmetric impact on heterogeneous firms. • End treatment and source control are important channels for improving efficiency. • Impact of different policy tools on energy-environment efficiency is heterogeneous. • Micro evidence for evaluating the effect of environmental regulation is provided. Energy-environment efficiency can be used as a means of control to change the mode of economic development by considering the pollution reduction factor. Taking China as an example, this study uses a nonradial superefficiency data envelopment analysis method to measure microlevel energy-environment efficiency and investigates the relationship between environmental regulation and efficiency. The findings show that for every 1% increase in environmental regulation, firms' energy-environment efficiency increases by approximately 0.04% and that environmental regulations have a greater impact on pollution-intensive firms and private firms compared to other types of firms. A median effect model shows that end treatment and source control are important channels through which environmental regulation can improve firms' energy-environment efficiency. In addition, the influence of different environmental regulation policy tools on firm energy-environment efficiency is heterogeneous. With every 1% increase in a command-and-control and market-based incentive policy, energy-environment efficiency increases by 0.01–0.02%, while the effect of public participation policy tools is not significant. This study provides not only new micro empirical evidence for evaluating the effect of environmental regulation but also a reference for applying and coordinating different types of environmental policy tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Proposing the STSL framework for target selection and compensation modes in win–win PES. • Constructing the environmental vulnerability-livelihood assets evaluation system. • Detecting the priority areas for implementing conservation PES or restoration PES. • Developing ten differentiated hematopoiesis payment modes. Spatial targets and payment modes are the key components for solving the issue of "where to pay and how to pay" and for supporting ecosystem service providers to achieve sustainable livelihoods and end poverty through payments for ecosystem services (PES) for environmental protection and poverty reduction. Here, we present the Spatial Targets and Sustainable Livelihoods (STSL) framework and analyze regional environmental vulnerability and livelihood assets in the Longnan Municipality of China. We constructed reasonable spatial targeting and payment modes according to each actual type. We classified the present 27 poverty-stricken areas in Longnan Municipality into two levels of environmental vulnerability, four classes in combination with natural capital, eight categories with the addition of human capital, and ten subcategories considering environmental vulnerability and all five livelihood assets. Finally, considering regional development and sustainable livelihoods for poor people, we suggest spatial layout targets for implementing conservation or restoration ecological projects and 10 differentiated payment modes. This study provides an appropriate proposal for certain regions to implement the environmental policy of win–win PES and fills the research gap regarding specific payment modes for PES. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]