**4. A dynamic analysis of energy efficiencies of 30 Chinese provinces during 2000-2003**

This section aims to investigate the total factor energy efficiency of main areas in china using the time-series data from 2000 to 2003. These areas shown in table 5 include 12 provinces in the east area, 10 provinces in the central area and 8 provinces in the west area. Consisting of fast-developing regions like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong etc., the east area owns GDP output around half of the country. The central area contains inland provinces such as Shanxi, Jilin, Henan etc. This area has a large population and tremendous potential. Compared with the other areas, the west area is the least developed region in China, containing provinces of Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan etc. In our study, Tibet, which is also a province in the west area, is missing due to the unavailability of data. Similar as the analysis in the above section, GDP is the only output and non-resource inputs are capital stock and labor while energy inputs are represented as crud oil, coal and electric power. The data on energy input are collected from China Energy Statistical Year Book (2004). GDP and labor data are collected from the Statistical Year Book of China published by National Bureau of Statistics during 2000-2003. The data on capital stock comes from Jun et al. [23].


**Table 5.** Chinese provinces in different areas

218 Energy Efficiency – The Innovative Ways for Smart Energy, the Future Towards Modern Utilities

\*D, I and C indicate decreasing, increasing and constant return-to-scale respectively.

**4. A dynamic analysis of energy efficiencies of 30 Chinese provinces** 

This section aims to investigate the total factor energy efficiency of main areas in china using the time-series data from 2000 to 2003. These areas shown in table 5 include 12 provinces in the east area, 10 provinces in the central area and 8 provinces in the west area. Consisting of fast-developing regions like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong etc., the east area owns GDP output around half of the country. The central area contains inland provinces such as Shanxi, Jilin, Henan etc. This area has a large population and tremendous potential. Compared with the other areas, the west area is the least developed region in China, containing provinces of Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan etc. In our study, Tibet, which is also a province in the west area, is missing due to the unavailability of data. Similar as the analysis in the above section, GDP is the only output and non-resource inputs are capital stock and labor while energy inputs are represented as crud oil, coal and electric power. The data on energy input are collected from China Energy Statistical Year Book (2004). GDP and labor

<sup>32</sup>Czech

**Table 4.** TFEE of 48 countries

**during 2000-2003** 

26 Ireland 1.0000 1 1.0000 1 C 27 Portugal 0.5362 21 0.6063 46 I 28 Thailand 0.1784 42 0.6815 44 D 29 Iran 1.0000 1 1.0000 1 C 30 Argentina 0.4820 23 1.0000 1 C 31 Malaysia 0.3039 34 0.8014 36 I

33 Hungary 0.3335 29 0.6999 43 I 34 Egypt 0.5630 20 1.0000 1 C 35 Pakistan 0.2114 38 0.8803 29 I 36 Philippines 0.3321 30 1.0000 1 I 37 New Zealand 0.4625 26 0.9426 25 I 38 Columbia 0.2926 35 0.7719 39 I 39 Chile 0.2814 36 0.7570 40 I 40 Peru 0.4730 24 1.0000 1 C 41 Romania 0.1478 44 0.8352 32 I 42 Bangladesh 1.0000 1 1.0000 1 C 43 Ukraine 0.0442 48 0.5624 47 I 44 Slovakia 0.1883 41 0.6789 45 I 45 Kazakhstan 0.1065 45 1.0000 1 I 46 Bulgaria 0.1558 43 1.0000 1 I 47 Lithuania 0.2046 39 1.0000 1 I 48 Uzbekistan 0.0710 46 1.0000 1 I

Republic 0.3341 28 0.5315 48 I

Curves in Figure 1 show the difference among the average TFEE scores of the provinces in the east, central and west areas using model (4). Obviously the east area is the most efficient and the west area is worst in any year. Meanwhile, it is shown that energy efficiencies for all areas are gradually improving. The detailed results are listed in Table 6. It can be easily observed from the table that most of efficient provinces are in the east area. TFEE scores of Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Guangdong, Guangxi, Hainan, Fujian are all at a high level. Provinces in the central area are not as good as the provinces in the east area except Anhui which is adjacent to the east area. Another province in the central area, Shanxi, for specially, has very low TFEE scores during the four years and makes little progress. The situation in the west area is even worse other than Sichuan, Yunnan, Qinghai and Ningxia.

Table 7 is used to clarify which part makes the energy efficiency get improvement. During 2000 to 2001, the average value of Malmquist production index (MPI) for all provinces is 1.13 which means the efficiency in 2001 is better than 2000. Catch-up effect (CE) and frontier-shift effect (FE) are two parameters to distinguish which part is functioned. The data on the last row show that the average value of CE is 1.00 and FE is 1.13. That is to say, the technical efficiency in 2001 is almost the same as that in 2000, while the production frontier gets improvement during the two years. Improvement is also achieved in next two years, but there is something different that both CE and FE are working.

Comparing the Dynamic Analysis of Energy Efficiency in China with Other Countries 221

CE FE MPI CE FE MPI CE FE MPI

No. Province 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003

Areas 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003

East area 1.00 1.03 1.04 1.02 1.07 1.09 1.01 1.07 1.08

West area 1.00 1.06 1.06 1.01 1.09 1.09 1.05 1.05 1.10

CE FE MPI CE FE MPI CE FE MPI

1.00 1.32 1.32 1.01 1.35 1.36 1.06 1.71 1.81

**Table 7.** Changes of 30 provinces during 2000-2003

**Table 8.** Average data of areas during 2000-2003

Central area

1 Beijing 1.11 1.05 1.17 1.01 1.05 1.06 1.03 1.07 1.11 2 Tianjin 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.00 1.02 1.02 1.00 1.07 1.07 3 Hebei 1.04 1.16 1.20 0.98 1.13 1.11 0.98 1.11 1.09 4 Liaoning 1.00 1.04 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.09 1.09 5 Shanghai 1.00 1.16 1.16 1.00 1.14 1.14 1.00 1.19 1.19 6 Jiangsu 1.00 1.20 1.20 1.00 1.16 1.16 1.00 1.10 1.10 7 Zhejiang 1.00 1.08 1.08 1.00 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.13 1.13 8 Shandong 0.88 1.10 0.97 1.13 1.10 1.24 1.00 1.15 1.15 9 Guangdong 1.00 1.18 1.18 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.00 1.06 1.06 10 Guangxi 1.00 1.08 1.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.07 1.01 11 Hainan 1.00 0.23 0.23 1.00 1.01 1.01 1.00 0.72 0.72 12 Fujian 1.00 1.08 1.08 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.07 1.07 13 Shanxi 0.99 1.04 1.03 1.16 1.06 1.23 1.14 1.05 1.19 14 Inner M 1.04 1.04 1.08 1.04 1.12 1.16 1.15 1.04 1.20 15 Jilin 1.03 1.01 1.04 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.10 0.98 1.08 16 Heilongjiang 0.94 1.01 0.95 1.13 0.98 1.11 1.10 0.96 1.05 17 Anhui 1.00 1.06 1.06 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.00 1.07 1.07 18 Jiangxi 1.03 1.00 1.03 1.02 1.00 1.02 1.00 0.96 0.96 19 Henan 1.00 1.16 1.16 0.99 1.14 1.13 1.11 4.19 4.65 20 Hubei 1.00 1.02 1.02 0.91 1.03 0.94 1.05 0.99 1.04 21 Hunan 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.96 1.02 0.96 0.98 22 Chongqing 1.00 3.58 3.58 1.00 3.82 3.82 1.00 4.27 4.27 23 Sichuan 1.00 1.53 1.53 1.00 1.68 1.68 1.00 1.59 1.59 24 Guizhou 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.99 1.02 1.01 1.26 0.82 1.04 25 Yunnan 1.00 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.12 1.12 1.00 1.16 1.16 26 Shaanxi 1.02 1.00 1.02 1.07 0.99 1.06 1.06 0.96 1.02 27 Gansu 1.00 1.02 1.02 0.98 1.03 1.01 0.99 1.04 1.03 28 Qinghai 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 29 Ningxia 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.90 0.90 30 Xinjiang 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.12 0.97 1.09 Average 1.00 1.13 1.13 1.01 1.16 1.17 1.04 1.26 1.30

In order to compare the trends of 3 areas, we make a summary in table 8 using the average data. It is clear that the central area has the greatest achievement and the west area is following. FE is always doing better than CE.


\*E, C and W indicate east area, central area and west area respectively.

**Table 6.** TFEE of 30 provinces during 2000-2003


Comparing the Dynamic Analysis of Energy Efficiency in China with Other Countries 221

**Table 7.** Changes of 30 provinces during 2000-2003

years, but there is something different that both CE and FE are working.

following. FE is always doing better than CE.

\*E, C and W indicate east area, central area and west area respectively.

**Table 6.** TFEE of 30 provinces during 2000-2003

the technical efficiency in 2001 is almost the same as that in 2000, while the production frontier gets improvement during the two years. Improvement is also achieved in next two

In order to compare the trends of 3 areas, we make a summary in table 8 using the average data. It is clear that the central area has the greatest achievement and the west area is

No. Province Area 2000 2001 2002 2003 1 Beijing E 0.8644 0.9557 0.9634 1.0000 2 Tianjin E 0.9911 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 3 Hebei E 0.7702 0.8028 0.7848 0.7663 4 Liaoning E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 5 Shanghai E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 6 Jiangsu E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 7 Zhejiang E 0.9949 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 8 Shandong E 1.0000 0.8836 0.9994 1.0000 9 Guangdong E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 10 Guangxi E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.9406 11 Hainan E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 12 Fujian E 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 13 Shanxi C 0.4510 0.4469 0.5150 0.5847 14 Inner M C 0.6664 0.6929 0.7194 0.8298 15 Jilin C 0.6657 0.6826 0.6890 0.7548 16 Heilongjiang C 0.8323 0.7791 0.8795 0.9683 17 Anhui C 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 18 Jiangxi C 0.9508 0.9800 1.0000 1.0000 19 Henan C 0.9075 0.9044 0.8967 1.0000 20 Hubei C 1.0000 1.0000 0.9077 0.9541 21 Hunan C 0.9284 0.9305 0.9138 0.9342 22 Chongqing C 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 23 Sichuan W 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 24 Guizhou W 0.5258 0.5232 0.5203 0.6556 25 Yunnan W 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 26 Shaanxi W 0.5191 0.5307 0.5701 0.6067 27 Gansu W 0.4206 0.4229 0.4153 0.4126 28 Qinghai W 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 29 Ningxia W 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 30 Xinjiang W 0.7356 0.7431 0.7497 0.8371


**Table 8.** Average data of areas during 2000-2003

It is interesting to investigate the individual province. Here are some examples. First, we make a comparison between Shanghai and Hainan both of which are efficient during the periods. However, detailed data indicate that Shanghai keeps making frontier forward gradually while Hainan are opposite except year 2002. This could be explained by that the location of Hainan on the frontier is on the edge. Second, take Beijing for example. Beijing is non-efficient from 2000 to 2002 and finally becomes efficient at 2003 by making efforts on improving technical efficiency and putting frontier forward. Third, energy efficiency of Shandong province suffers a decline and is back to the normal level later. MPI during first period is decreasing mainly caused by declining CE. In the next two years, some parameters get recovery which makes MPI increasing.

Comparing the Dynamic Analysis of Energy Efficiency in China with Other Countries 223

We would like to thank the financial support by Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University, Ministry of Education of China and National Natural Science Foundation of

[1] Ang, B., Monitoring changes in economy-wide energy efficiency: From energy-GDP

[2] Ang, B., A statistical analysis of energy coefficients. Energy economics, 1991. 13(2): p.

[3] Howarth, R.B., et al., Manufacturing energy use in eight OECD countries: Decomposing the impacts of changes in output, industry structure and energy intensity. Energy

[4] A Greening, L., D.L. Greene, and C. Difiglio, Energy efficiency and consumption—the

[5] Xu Xiping, liang Liang. Energy Efficiency and Productivity of China: Compared with other Countries. ICCS 2007, Part III, LNCS 4489, pp.988-991, 2007, Beijing, China. [6] Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, and E. Rhodes, Measuring the efficiency of decision making

[7] Zhou, P., B.W. Ang, and K.L. Poh, A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies. European Journal of Operational Research, 2008. 189(1): p. 1-18. [8] Mohammadi, A., et al., Energy efficiency improvement and input cost saving in kiwifruit production using Data Envelopment Analysis approach. Renewable Energy,

[9] Rao, X., et al., Energy efficiency and energy saving potential in China: An analysis based on slacks-based measure model. Computers & Industrial Engineering,

[10] Bian, Y. and F. Yang, Resource and environment efficiency analysis of provinces in China: A DEA approach based on Shannon's entropy. Energy Policy, 2010. 38(4): p.

[11] Boyd, G.A. and J.X. Pang, Estimating the linkage between energy efficiency and

[12] Hu, J.L. and S.C. Wang, Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in China. Energy

[13] Honma, S. and J.L. Hu, Total-factor energy efficiency of regions in Japan. Energy Policy,

[14] Honma, S. and J.L. Hu, Total-factor energy productivity growth of regions in Japan.

[15] Odeck, J., Assessing the relative efficiency and productivity growth of vehicle inspection services: An application of DEA and Malmquist indices. European Journal of

productivity. Energy Policy, 2000. 28(5): p. 289-296.

Policy, 2006. 34(17): p. 3206-3217.

Energy Policy, 2009. 37(10): p. 3941-3950.

Operational Research, 2000. 126(3): p. 501-514.

2008. 36(2): p. 821-833.

ratio to composite efficiency index. Energy Policy, 2006. 34(5): p. 574-582.

China (Grant No. 70801056, 71121061, 71090401/71090400 and 71110107024).

rebound effect—a survey. Energy Policy, 2000. 28(6): p. 389-401.

units. European Journal of Operational Research, 1978. 2(6): p. 429-444.

**Acknowledgement** 

**6. References** 

93-110.

economics, 1991. 13(2): p. 135-142.

2011. 36(9): p. 2573-2579.

2011(0).

1909-1917.
