Conservation policies and programs may trigger unintended, potentially irreversible, changes that were initially not anticipated. Concerns have been raised that the introduction of payments for environmental services (PES) fosters the privatization of natural ecosystems to the detriment of marginalized groups. We assess the long-term impacts of PES on sharing of access to natural resources, associated norms, and social preferences. The studied PES program was implemented as a randomized control trial in western Uganda. Using survey and experimental data collected six years after the last payments were made, we find that the PES program did not lead to a lasting shift in resource sharing practices but did induce stronger social norms for resource sharing. Moreover, landowners in former PES villages exhibit more egalitarian social preferences than landowners in control villages. These results highlight that despite introducing unequal conservation benefits to communities, long-lasting negative spillovers of PES could be avoided.
{"title":"Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Access and Social Preferences in the Long Run? Experimental Evidence from Uganda","authors":"Tobias Vorlaufer, Joost de Laat, S. Engel","doi":"10.1086/721440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721440","url":null,"abstract":"Conservation policies and programs may trigger unintended, potentially irreversible, changes that were initially not anticipated. Concerns have been raised that the introduction of payments for environmental services (PES) fosters the privatization of natural ecosystems to the detriment of marginalized groups. We assess the long-term impacts of PES on sharing of access to natural resources, associated norms, and social preferences. The studied PES program was implemented as a randomized control trial in western Uganda. Using survey and experimental data collected six years after the last payments were made, we find that the PES program did not lead to a lasting shift in resource sharing practices but did induce stronger social norms for resource sharing. Moreover, landowners in former PES villages exhibit more egalitarian social preferences than landowners in control villages. These results highlight that despite introducing unequal conservation benefits to communities, long-lasting negative spillovers of PES could be avoided.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"10 1","pages":"389 - 412"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45416900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper provides quasi-experimental evidence from Ghana on the impact of fossil fuel subsidy removal on cooking fuel choices. We find that households “stepped down the energy ladder”: modern fuel use decreased, while the use of transition and traditional fuels expanded. Price increases of 50% for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and 20% for diesel caused the share of households who mainly use firewood to increase by 3 percentage points. Urban households increased charcoal consumption by around 17%, while LPG expenditure remained constant—indicating that consumption dropped. Back-of-the-envelope cost-benefit calculations suggest that overall welfare costs, including from increased cooking-related greenhouse gas emissions, were slightly higher than fiscal savings. The LPG subsidy removal in particular was likely socially damaging. Our findings highlight the ambiguous impacts of removing LPG subsidies in developing-country contexts, where they contribute to the adoption and use of clean cooking fuels.
{"title":"“Stepping Down the Ladder”: The Impacts of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Removal in a Developing Country","authors":"H. Greve, J. Lay","doi":"10.1086/721375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721375","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides quasi-experimental evidence from Ghana on the impact of fossil fuel subsidy removal on cooking fuel choices. We find that households “stepped down the energy ladder”: modern fuel use decreased, while the use of transition and traditional fuels expanded. Price increases of 50% for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and 20% for diesel caused the share of households who mainly use firewood to increase by 3 percentage points. Urban households increased charcoal consumption by around 17%, while LPG expenditure remained constant—indicating that consumption dropped. Back-of-the-envelope cost-benefit calculations suggest that overall welfare costs, including from increased cooking-related greenhouse gas emissions, were slightly higher than fiscal savings. The LPG subsidy removal in particular was likely socially damaging. Our findings highlight the ambiguous impacts of removing LPG subsidies in developing-country contexts, where they contribute to the adoption and use of clean cooking fuels.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"10 1","pages":"121 - 158"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42652529","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Plantinga, Randall Walsh, Matthew J Wibbenmeyer
Costs of fighting wildfires have increased substantially over the past several decades. Yet surprisingly little is known about the effectiveness of wildfire suppression or how wildfire incident managers prioritize resources threatened within a wildfire incident. We investigate the determinants of wildfire suppression effort using a novel empirical strategy comparing over 1,400 historical fire perimeters to the spatial distribution of assets at risk. We find that fires are more likely to stop spreading as they approach homes, particularly when homes are of greater value. This effect persists after controlling for physical factors (fuels, landscape, and weather) using a state-of-the-art wildfire simulation tool. As well, the probability that spread will be halted is affected by characteristics of homes 1–2 kilometers beyond a fire’s edge. Overall, we find that suppression efforts can substantively affect wildfire outcomes but that some groups may benefit more from wildfire management than others.
{"title":"Priorities and Effectiveness in Wildfire Management: Evidence from Fire Spread in the Western United States","authors":"A. Plantinga, Randall Walsh, Matthew J Wibbenmeyer","doi":"10.1086/719426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/719426","url":null,"abstract":"Costs of fighting wildfires have increased substantially over the past several decades. Yet surprisingly little is known about the effectiveness of wildfire suppression or how wildfire incident managers prioritize resources threatened within a wildfire incident. We investigate the determinants of wildfire suppression effort using a novel empirical strategy comparing over 1,400 historical fire perimeters to the spatial distribution of assets at risk. We find that fires are more likely to stop spreading as they approach homes, particularly when homes are of greater value. This effect persists after controlling for physical factors (fuels, landscape, and weather) using a state-of-the-art wildfire simulation tool. As well, the probability that spread will be halted is affected by characteristics of homes 1–2 kilometers beyond a fire’s edge. Overall, we find that suppression efforts can substantively affect wildfire outcomes but that some groups may benefit more from wildfire management than others.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"9 1","pages":"603 - 639"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45467717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper characterizes the growth of sulfur dioxide emissions among Chinese manufacturers during the WTO-accession period. By failing to account for contemporaneous changes in markups, we demonstrate that standard emissions analyses overemphasize within-firm reductions in emissions intensity, while undervaluing the role of resource reallocation across firms. We derive an unbiased decomposition of aggregate emissions and find that emissions increased nearly one for one with total production. Although improved technology mitigated emissions growth by 18%–21% between 2000 and 2005, these gains were completely offset by resource reallocation toward dirty producers over the same time frame. Our findings imply that lowering future emissions growth among Chinese manufacturers may require lowering aggregate manufacturing production or fundamentally changing Chinese industrial composition toward cleaner industries.
{"title":"The Curious Case of the Missing Chinese Emissions","authors":"Joel Rodrigue, Dan Sheng, Y. Tan","doi":"10.1086/719021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/719021","url":null,"abstract":"This paper characterizes the growth of sulfur dioxide emissions among Chinese manufacturers during the WTO-accession period. By failing to account for contemporaneous changes in markups, we demonstrate that standard emissions analyses overemphasize within-firm reductions in emissions intensity, while undervaluing the role of resource reallocation across firms. We derive an unbiased decomposition of aggregate emissions and find that emissions increased nearly one for one with total production. Although improved technology mitigated emissions growth by 18%–21% between 2000 and 2005, these gains were completely offset by resource reallocation toward dirty producers over the same time frame. Our findings imply that lowering future emissions growth among Chinese manufacturers may require lowering aggregate manufacturing production or fundamentally changing Chinese industrial composition toward cleaner industries.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"9 1","pages":"755 - 805"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46773064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Carbon-pricing policies worldwide are increasingly coupled with direct or indirect subsidies where emissions pricing revenues are rebated to the regulated entities. This study analyzes the incentives created by two novel forms of rebating that reward additional emission intensity reductions: one given in proportion to output (intensity-based output rebating) and another that rebates a share of emission payments (intensity-based emission rebating). These forms are contrasted with output-based rebating, abatement-based rebating, and lump-sum rebating. Given the same emission price, intensity-based output rebating incentivizes the most intensity reductions, while abatement-based rebating causes the most output reductions, and output-based rebating puts the least pressure on output (and emissions); intensity-based emissions rebating lies in between these, by implicitly subsidizing emissions while incentivizing intensity reductions. The study supplements partial equilibrium theoretical analysis with numerical simulations to assess the performance of different mechanisms in a multisector general equilibrium model that accounts for economy-wide market interactions.
{"title":"Intensity-Based Rebating of Emission Pricing Revenues","authors":"Christoph Böhringer, C. Fischer, N. Rivers","doi":"10.1086/723645","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723645","url":null,"abstract":"Carbon-pricing policies worldwide are increasingly coupled with direct or indirect subsidies where emissions pricing revenues are rebated to the regulated entities. This study analyzes the incentives created by two novel forms of rebating that reward additional emission intensity reductions: one given in proportion to output (intensity-based output rebating) and another that rebates a share of emission payments (intensity-based emission rebating). These forms are contrasted with output-based rebating, abatement-based rebating, and lump-sum rebating. Given the same emission price, intensity-based output rebating incentivizes the most intensity reductions, while abatement-based rebating causes the most output reductions, and output-based rebating puts the least pressure on output (and emissions); intensity-based emissions rebating lies in between these, by implicitly subsidizing emissions while incentivizing intensity reductions. The study supplements partial equilibrium theoretical analysis with numerical simulations to assess the performance of different mechanisms in a multisector general equilibrium model that accounts for economy-wide market interactions.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"10 1","pages":"1059 - 1089"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49396088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A number of policies and programs are aimed at reducing energy use in buildings—building energy codes, disclosure laws, energy-use benchmarking, and mandated or subsidized energy audits. In the United States, many of these initiatives are enacted at the state or local level. At the federal level, one of the main programs is Energy Star certification, which provides a label to top energy-performing buildings. In this paper, we evaluate changes in rents and utility expenditures following Energy Star certification using a national sample of over 4,100 office buildings combined with Energy Star data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We find that building rents increase by 3.6% following certification, but that utility expenditures remain unchanged. We provide novel evidence that buildings do not make upgrades or capital investments to obtain a certification, suggesting that the Energy Star program primarily certifies buildings that are already energy efficient.
{"title":"Does Energy Star Certification Reduce Energy Use in Commercial Buildings?","authors":"Becka Brolinson, K. Palmer, M. Walls","doi":"10.1086/720952","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/720952","url":null,"abstract":"A number of policies and programs are aimed at reducing energy use in buildings—building energy codes, disclosure laws, energy-use benchmarking, and mandated or subsidized energy audits. In the United States, many of these initiatives are enacted at the state or local level. At the federal level, one of the main programs is Energy Star certification, which provides a label to top energy-performing buildings. In this paper, we evaluate changes in rents and utility expenditures following Energy Star certification using a national sample of over 4,100 office buildings combined with Energy Star data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). We find that building rents increase by 3.6% following certification, but that utility expenditures remain unchanged. We provide novel evidence that buildings do not make upgrades or capital investments to obtain a certification, suggesting that the Energy Star program primarily certifies buildings that are already energy efficient.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"10 1","pages":"55 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41881482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Energy efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions standards apply to many consumer durables, such as refrigerators and passenger vehicles. Welfare analysis of these standards is complicated by the fact that product manufacturers choose a wide range of product attributes, many of which are unobserved by the researcher. Whereas the literature has considered the effects of standards on product prices, energy efficiency, and perhaps one or two other attributes, we show that in a differentiated product market, standards can affect virtually any product attribute, and those effects have ambiguous implications for consumer welfare. This paper implements a novel strategy to estimate the causal welfare effects of standards on product attributes. Considering European carbon dioxide emissions standards for passenger vehicles, we find that these standards have reduced fuel consumption and emissions. However, the standards have unintentionally reduced vehicle quality, which undermines 26% of the welfare gains of the standards.
{"title":"Environmental Regulation and Product Attributes: The Case of European Passenger Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards","authors":"Yujie Lin, Joshua Linn","doi":"10.1086/720903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/720903","url":null,"abstract":"Energy efficiency and carbon dioxide emissions standards apply to many consumer durables, such as refrigerators and passenger vehicles. Welfare analysis of these standards is complicated by the fact that product manufacturers choose a wide range of product attributes, many of which are unobserved by the researcher. Whereas the literature has considered the effects of standards on product prices, energy efficiency, and perhaps one or two other attributes, we show that in a differentiated product market, standards can affect virtually any product attribute, and those effects have ambiguous implications for consumer welfare. This paper implements a novel strategy to estimate the causal welfare effects of standards on product attributes. Considering European carbon dioxide emissions standards for passenger vehicles, we find that these standards have reduced fuel consumption and emissions. However, the standards have unintentionally reduced vehicle quality, which undermines 26% of the welfare gains of the standards.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"10 1","pages":"1 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49566882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Burtraw, Charles A. Holt, K. Palmer, William M. Shobe
Environmental policy with uncertainty is often posed as a choice between price and quantity instruments. Adding flexibility to fixed policy instruments can improve outcomes. Roberts and Spence noted the efficiency advantages of matching emissions allowances supply to the marginal damage schedule. We propose an implementable approach to making that match, an approach we call “price-responsive supply,” which treats prices and quantities as simultaneously determined in the allowance auction. For competitive environments, price-responsive supply outperforms fixed-price and fixed-quantity instruments. Price-responsive supply can enhance the performance of real-world regulatory environments through an automatic adjustment mechanism that responds instantaneously to new information about abatement costs. We demonstrate the improved performance of price-responsive supply in experiments and simulations. A price-responsive supply schedule, while offering efficiency advantages, also translates the cost-lowering effects of other, coincident policies into accelerated reductions under an emissions cap, thereby helping to resolve the waterbed effect.
{"title":"Price-Responsive Allowance Supply in Emissions Markets","authors":"D. Burtraw, Charles A. Holt, K. Palmer, William M. Shobe","doi":"10.1086/720690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/720690","url":null,"abstract":"Environmental policy with uncertainty is often posed as a choice between price and quantity instruments. Adding flexibility to fixed policy instruments can improve outcomes. Roberts and Spence noted the efficiency advantages of matching emissions allowances supply to the marginal damage schedule. We propose an implementable approach to making that match, an approach we call “price-responsive supply,” which treats prices and quantities as simultaneously determined in the allowance auction. For competitive environments, price-responsive supply outperforms fixed-price and fixed-quantity instruments. Price-responsive supply can enhance the performance of real-world regulatory environments through an automatic adjustment mechanism that responds instantaneously to new information about abatement costs. We demonstrate the improved performance of price-responsive supply in experiments and simulations. A price-responsive supply schedule, while offering efficiency advantages, also translates the cost-lowering effects of other, coincident policies into accelerated reductions under an emissions cap, thereby helping to resolve the waterbed effect.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"9 1","pages":"851 - 884"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60726772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Experiences in real-world pollution markets suggest that firms make persistent errors in forecasting allowance and credit prices that inform their investment decisions. The residual uncertainty characterizing allowance and credit trading means that pollution markets may fail to deliver cost-effective abatement. This contrasts with price-based policies under which firms make investments that equate marginal abatement cost to an emission tax. We incorporate the additional cost of forecast errors under quantity-based programs into a standard Weitzman-style prices versus quantities framework. We distinguish between individual firms’ uncertainty over competitors’ private information and systemic uncertainty over future cost shocks. We show that a welfare-maximizing regulator would favor price instruments in response to the prospect of firm-specific forecast errors under quantity instruments, ceteris paribus, and the relative benefit of price instruments increases with forecast error variance. We discuss the role of policy design, such as incorporating price collars, in mitigating cost inefficiencies from price forecast errors.
{"title":"The Welfare Implications of Carbon Price Certainty","authors":"Joseph E. Aldy, Sarah Armitage","doi":"10.1086/720768","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/720768","url":null,"abstract":"Experiences in real-world pollution markets suggest that firms make persistent errors in forecasting allowance and credit prices that inform their investment decisions. The residual uncertainty characterizing allowance and credit trading means that pollution markets may fail to deliver cost-effective abatement. This contrasts with price-based policies under which firms make investments that equate marginal abatement cost to an emission tax. We incorporate the additional cost of forecast errors under quantity-based programs into a standard Weitzman-style prices versus quantities framework. We distinguish between individual firms’ uncertainty over competitors’ private information and systemic uncertainty over future cost shocks. We show that a welfare-maximizing regulator would favor price instruments in response to the prospect of firm-specific forecast errors under quantity instruments, ceteris paribus, and the relative benefit of price instruments increases with forecast error variance. We discuss the role of policy design, such as incorporating price collars, in mitigating cost inefficiencies from price forecast errors.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"9 1","pages":"921 - 946"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46689406","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
E. Ansink, M. Koetse, J. Bouma, D. Hauck, D. van Soest
Crowdfunding has become an increasingly popular means to fund the provision of public goods and especially of nature conservation projects. We implement a lab-in-the-field experiment by setting up a web-based user interface, very similar to actual crowdfunding platforms, to test whether coordination mechanisms, like seed money and decoy projects, can increase the effectiveness of crowdfunding campaigns if multiple public goods projects are eligible for funding. We find some of our treatments to affect coordination especially via early contributions, but not always in an intuitive way. Our results are confirmed in a follow-up experiment with actual nature conservation projects.
{"title":"Crowdfunding Conservation (and Other Public Goods)","authors":"E. Ansink, M. Koetse, J. Bouma, D. Hauck, D. van Soest","doi":"10.1086/718280","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/718280","url":null,"abstract":"Crowdfunding has become an increasingly popular means to fund the provision of public goods and especially of nature conservation projects. We implement a lab-in-the-field experiment by setting up a web-based user interface, very similar to actual crowdfunding platforms, to test whether coordination mechanisms, like seed money and decoy projects, can increase the effectiveness of crowdfunding campaigns if multiple public goods projects are eligible for funding. We find some of our treatments to affect coordination especially via early contributions, but not always in an intuitive way. Our results are confirmed in a follow-up experiment with actual nature conservation projects.","PeriodicalId":47114,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists","volume":"9 1","pages":"565 - 602"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49209266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：