AJIBM  Vol.6 No.4 , April 2016
Will Chinese System of Fiscal Decentralization Inhibit the Environmental Investment?
Abstract: This paper mainly investigated the effect of Chinese system of fiscal decentralization on the environmental investment. Being different from the previous studies that believed fiscal decentralization would inhibit the environmental investment, this paper believed that the fiscal decentralization both had a substitution effect and an income effect on the environmental investment, there was a U-type relationship between the both. Thus, a fiscal system reform has to be done, and more than anything else, the transfer payment from the exchequer to the less developed areas needs to be enhanced to solve the environmental issue of the less developed areas.
Cite this paper: Kang, D. (2016) Will Chinese System of Fiscal Decentralization Inhibit the Environmental Investment?. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 6, 439-443. doi: 10.4236/ajibm.2016.64040.

[1]   Zhang, X.Y. (2015) Study on the local Governmental Behavior and Environment Pollution Issue with the Background of Fiscal Decentralization. Inquiry into Economic Issues, No. 3, 32-41.

[2]   Fu, Y. (2010) Fiscal Decentralization, Government Treatment and Supply of Non-Economic Public Goods. Economic Research, No. 8, 4-15.

[3]   Yang, R.L., Zhang, Q. and Zhou, Y.A. (2007) fiscal Decentralization, Public Preference and Environment Pollution—The Evidence from Chinese Provincial Panel Data. Macroeconomic Report of Institute of Economics of School of Economics of Renmin University of China, Beijing.

[4]   Li, M. (2009) Fiscal Decentralization and Environment Pollution—Correction to Environmental Kuznets Assumption. Economic Review, No. 5, 54-59.

[5]   Tan, Z.X. and Zhang, Y.Y. (2015) Empirical Study on the Relation between Fiscal Decentralization and Environment Pollution. China Population Resources and Environment, No. 4, 110-117.

[6]   Zhang, Y.Z. and Zhu, P.F. (2010) Empirical Study on the Local Environmental Expenditure. Economic research, No. 5, 82-93.