Evaluation of the Policy Effect of China’s Environmental Interview System for Effective Air Quality Governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People's Republic of China formally proposed an environmental interview system in May 2014, which applies pressure on local governments to fulfill their responsibility toward environmental protection by conducting face-to-face public interviews with their officials. In this paper, 48 cities that were publicly interviewed from 2014-2020 were considered the experimental group and 48 cities surrounding them were the control group. First, the dynamic panel model is applied to initially determine the effect of the policy. Then, a regression discontinuity method (Sharp RD) is used to analyze the short-term and long-term effects and compare the reasons for the differences observed among the estimates of various types of samples. Finally, a series of robustness tests were also conducted. The results show that the environmental interview system can improve air quality. However, because an emergency short-term local governance system exists at present, the governance effect is not long-term and, therefore, not sustainable. Therefore, it suggests that the government should continue to improve the environmental interview system, establish an optimal environmental protection incentive mechanism, and encourage local governments to implement environmental protection policies effectively in the long term. The results of the research are of great significance to the environmental impact assessment system of the world, especially in countries with similar economic systems, which are facing a trade-off between economic growth and environmental sustainability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".