The Impact of Firm Productivity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from Listed Companies in China

Research Article
Open access

The Impact of Firm Productivity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from Listed Companies in China

Hongyang Ruan 1*
  • 1 School of International Governance Innovation, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China    
  • *corresponding author 20243950014@mail.gdufs.edu.cn
AEMPS Vol.179
ISSN (Print): 2754-1177
ISSN (Online): 2754-1169
ISBN (Print): 978-1-80590-071-9
ISBN (Online): 978-1-80590-072-6

Abstract

As climate change accelerates, carbon reduction is a global priority. China, as the largest emitter, faces the challenge of balancing growth and sustainability. The influence of productivity improvements on emission reduction remains a key question. This study aims to explore the impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions. By panel data regression method, the paper uses data from China’s Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies from 2015 to 2022 to examine the relationship between enterprise productivity and carbon emission. The results show that increased productivity has significantly reduced the amount of carbon emitted per unit of output. In addition, heterogeneity analysis shows that regional characteristics play an important role on the relationship between productivity and carbon emissions, the impact in the eastern region is significantly stronger than in the central and western regions. Thus, enterprises should boost productivity through green innovation and energy optimization to reduce emissions and support sustainable development.

Keywords:

Firm Productivity, Carbon Emissions, Listed Companies in China, Panel Data, Green Technology

Ruan,H. (2025). The Impact of Firm Productivity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from Listed Companies in China. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,179,7-13.
Export citation

1. Introduction

With the increasing severity of global climate change, reducing carbon emissions has become a top priority for governments worldwide. As the world’s largest developing country and carbon emitter, China faces marked challenges in tackling climate change and transitioning to a greener economy. A major source to these emissions is the industrial and heavy industries sector, which, with its high energy consumption, is vital to the country’s overall carbon footprint. In recent decades, driven by the transformation and upgrading of China’s economic structure and technological advancements, many enterprises have made remarkable strides in improving productivity and optimizing resource allocation. Increased productivity is often linked by technological innovation, equipment upgrades, and improved management efficiency, improving energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions per unit of output [1]. However, the link between business productivity and carbon emissions has not been extensively studied, particularly in China, where research on this topic is limited. In certain high-pollution industries, productivity gains may increase environmental pressures by expanding production capacity instead of reducing carbon emissions [2]. This study aims to explore the impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions, focusing on publicly listed Chinese companies. These companies are significant in both resource consumption and carbon emissions, while also leading in technological innovation and management improvements. Thus, the relationship between enterprise productivity and carbon emissions is studied, which provides important theoretical support and policy advice for China to achieve green and low-carbon transformation.

2. Theoretical framework and literature review

2.1. Relationship between carbon emissions and firm productivity

The relationship between firm productivity and carbon emissions is complex, and researchers have proposed various theoretical models and hypotheses from different perspectives. According to the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) theory, in the early stages of economic development, carbon emissions increase as productivity rises. However, once a certain level of economic development is reached, further improvements in productivity lead to a decline in carbon emissions [3]. This view highlights the importance of technological progress, institutional innovation, and policy support in reducing emissions. Early empirical research supports this theory, showing that productivity gains, often driven by technological innovation and energy efficiency, reduce carbon emissions per unit of output [4]. However, some studies show that in highly polluting industries or low-tech enterprises, higher productivity may not always reduce emissions. Instead, it could exacerbate environmental pressures as production scales expand [2].

2.2. Related studies on productivity and carbon emissions in China

At present, research on the relationship between productivity and carbon emissions in China is still limited, with some exploring how environmental regulations contribute to economic transformation from a policy standpoint [5]. For example, studies on Chinese industrial firms suggest that strict environmental policies may drive technological upgrades, leading to higher productivity and lower carbon emissions [6]. However, other studies have indicated that China’s heavy and high-polluting industries continue to face significant carbon emission pressures during economic growth, making substantial short-term emission reductions through productivity gains challenging [7].

In recent years, with the rise of green finance and innovation, researchers have focused on how enterprises can boost productivity and reduce carbon emissions through green technology [8]. For example, green technology innovation has greatly enhanced productivity in China’s manufacturing sector, improved energy efficiency, and lowered carbon intensity [9]. Moreover, studies on Chinese listed companies show that investing in green technology R&D and refining production processes can significantly increase productivity while lowering carbon emissions [10]. Despite the numerous studies exploring the relationship between productivity and carbon emissions, there is still a lack of empirical analysis based on specific groups of listed companies in China. Most existing literature focuses on the overall economy or industry-level analysis, overlooking the unique micro-role of China’s listed companies in the green transition. Moreover, many studies concentrate on a single industry or region, with a lack of systematic analysis covering a broad range of samples nationwide. Therefore, this study addresses this gap by analyzing data from Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share listed companies in China, aiming to reveal the impact of productivity gains on carbon emissions while also discussing the effects of regional differences.

3. Methodology

3.1. Data and sample selection

The research data in this study comes from A-share listed companies in China, covering panel data from 2015 to 2022. Productivity is calculated by integrating and weighting data on production tools and labor force. The data is sourced from CSMAR, the Wind database, corporate annual reports, and industry reports, providing insights into production tools, labor, and carbon emissions. The sample includes all A-share companies with complete data during this period, excluding those with missing or incomplete information, ensuring a representative and diverse sample across industries and company sizes.

3.2. Variable definition and measurement

The core explanatory variable is enterprise productivity, calculated by weighting production tools such as capital equipment and fixed assets against labor data like employee numbers and labor input. This indicator reflects production efficiency and is standardized for comparability across companies. The core explained variable is the carbon emission level of enterprises, measured according to the Guidelines for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Enterprises issued by China’s National Development and Reform Commission. The carbon emission data mainly comes from the greenhouse gas emission disclosures in corporate annual reports. All carbon emission data is standardized to per-unit carbon emissions for cross-company comparability. This method enables a comprehensive evaluation of carbon emissions across different industries and company sizes, as well as an analysis of their relationship with productivity.

To accurately analyze the relationship between carbon emissions and productivity, this study introduces several control variables. Specifically, the return on assets (ROA) is used to measure the profitability of an enterprise, calculated by dividing net profit by total assets; the proportion of fixed assets (Fixed) is obtained by dividing net fixed assets by total assets, reflecting the company's asset structure and long-term capital investment; the board size (Board) is measured by the number of board members, indicating the complexity of the company’s governance structure; the proportion of ownership held by the largest shareholder (Top) represents the share of total capital held by the largest shareholder, which may affect strategic decisions, including those related to carbon emission management; cash holdings (Cash) are derived from the company’s balance sheet, thus reflecting liquidity and fund management; the growth rate of total assets (Tagr) is calculated by subtracting the beginning period's total assets from the ending period's total assets, divided by the beginning period’s total assets, indicating the asset growth of the enterprise; the rate of investment expenditure (Invt) reflects the company’s attitude towards expansion and investment, calculated as the ratio of investment expenditure to total assets or total income; the number of employees (Noemp) is used to measure the scale of the company, based on the number of employees each year; and the number of independent directors (AD) serves as a measure of governance transparency and decision-making autonomy.

3.3. Descriptive statistical analysis

By summarizing the distribution, central tendency, and variability of the primary variables, Table 1 establishes a foundation for the subsequent regression analysis.

Table 1: Summary statistics of key variables

VarName

Obs

Mean

SD

Min

Max

CO2

22494

2.531

0.122

1.812

2.988

EP

29875

0.007

0.011

0.000

0.291

ROA

22494

0.042

0.064

-0.373

0.247

Fixed

22494

0.226

0.154

0.002

0.719

Board

22494

2.117

0.195

1.609

2.708

Top

22494

34.248

14.584

8.020

75.525

Cash

68697

0.195

0.155

0.000

1.000

Tagr

68697

0.194

0.902

-1.000

107.128

Invt

68697

0.050

0.055

-0.000

0.759

Noemp

68697

0.446

1.716

0.000

70.350

AD

68697

3.161

1.697

0.000

13.000

3.4. Model construction

To examine the relationship between enterprise productivity and carbon emissions, the following baseline regression model is developed:

\( {CO_{{2_{it}}}}=α+{β_{1}}E{P_{it}}+{β_{2}}{X_{it}}+{μ_{i}}+{γ_{t}}+{ϵ_{it}} \) (1)

where \( {CO_{{2_{it}}}} \) represents the carbon emission level of enterprise \( i \) at time \( t \) , expressed as carbon emissions per unit; \( {EP_{it}} \) represents the productivity level of enterprise \( i \) i at time \( t \) ; \( {X_{it}} \) is a set of control variables used to control for other factors that may affect carbon emissions; \( {μ_{i}} \) is individual fixed effect, control all enterprise characteristics that do not change over time; \( {γ_{t}} \) is time fixed effect, control for all factors that change over time but are the same for all businesses; and \( {ϵ_{it}} \) is a random error term.

4. Results

4.1. Baseline regression

The impact of enterprise productivity on carbon emissions is presented in Table 2, with regression analysis conducted both without control variables (column 1) and with control variables (column 2). Productivity has a significant negative effect on carbon emissions, with a regression coefficient of -0.213 and significant at the significance level of 5% (T-value -2.45). This suggests that increases in firm productivity significantly reduce carbon emissions. After adding control variables, the effect of firm productivity on carbon emissions remains significant, with a regression coefficient of -0.166 and a t-value of -1.98, significant at the 5% level. Although the negative impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions weakens after the addition of control variables, it still remains significant. This finding indicates that improving production efficiency can be an important way for companies to achieve low-carbon development.

Table 2: Impact of enterprise productivity on carbon emissions

(1) CO2

(2) CO2

EP

-0.213**

-0.166**

(-2.45)

(-1.98)

ROA

0.158***

(14.80)

Fixed

0.005

(0.39)

Board

0.018***

(3.67)

Top

-0.000

(-0.59)

Cash

-0.013**

(-1.97)

Tagr

0.002

(0.83)

Invt

0.023

(1.25)

Noemp

0.010***

(3.34)

AD

0.000

(1.03)

Constant

2.533***

2.484***

(3,588.19)

(202.44)

Observations

17768

17,768

R-squared

0.937

0.942

Enterprise FE

YES

YES

Year FE

YES

YES

4.2. Robustness test

Firstly, the firm-clustered robust standard errors in the baseline regression are substituted with industry-clustered robust standard errors to ensure the reliability of the regression results, as shown in Column (1). Under this adjustment, the regression results show that firm productivity continues to have a significant negative impact on carbon emissions, with a coefficient of -0.147 and a t-value of -2.19. This result suggests that when using industry-clustered standard errors, the suppressing effect of firm productivity on carbon emissions remains stable and is not affected by the change in the clustering method, indicating that firm productivity still exerts a significant negative impact after controlling for industry effects.

Next, the PPML method (Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood regressions) is further employed, with results presented in Column (2). PPML models are especially suited for models with positive count (and non-count) outcome variables, where applying least-squares regression to outcome variables like log(y) could lead to inconsistent estimates due to heteroscedasticity. After applying this method, the regression results continue to show a significant negative effect of productivity on carbon emissions, with a coefficient of -0.066, which remains statistically significant at the 5% level (t-value = -1.96). The PPML method supports the findings of the original regression model, further strengthening its robustness. This indicates that the emission reduction impact of increased firm productivity remains significant even when using different estimation methods.

Overall, the robustness checks confirm the stable negative impact of productivity improvement on carbon emissions, which remains unaffected by changes in standard error clustering methods and estimation techniques.

4.3. Regional heterogeneity

The impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions was investigated for regional heterogeneity by categorizing firms into eastern, central, and western regions, as shown in Table 3. In column (3), regression results show that the impact of enterprise productivity on carbon emissions in the eastern region is -0.181, and it is significant at the significance level of 5% (T-value is -2.07). In column (4), the negative impact of firm productivity is 0.150, but not statistically significant (T-value = 0.66). Finally, column (5) presents the regression results for the western region, where the coefficient is -0.540, though it is not statistically significant (T-value = -1.61).

This result may reflect the more advanced technology and stronger environmental policy support in the eastern region, which enable firms to reduce carbon emissions more effectively. In contrast,in the central region, the impact of enterprise productivity on carbon emissions is weak, mainly due to the relatively insufficient technical and policy support in the central region. Also, the economic development level of the western region is lower than that of the eastern and central regions, and the implementation of environmental protection technologies and policies is more lagging, resulting in the improvement of western enterprise productivity has a weakest impact on carbon emissions.

Table 3: Impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions by region

(1) Industry clustering

(2) ppml

(3) Eastern

(4) Central

(5) Western

EP

-0.147**

-0.066*

-0.181**

0.150

-0.540

(-2.19)

(-1.96)

(-2.07)

(0.66)

(-1.61)

Constant

2.484***

0.911***

2.498***

2.504***

2.423***

(204.51)

(186.62)

(170.20)

(91.52)

(69.52)

Observations

17,461

17,768

12,794

2,718

2,229

R-squared

0.942

-

0.945

0.949

0.938

Control

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Standard error clustering

Industry

Enterprise

Enterprise

Enterprise

Enterprise

Enterprise FE

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Year FE

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

5. Conclusion

This study, using data from Chinese listed companies between 2015 and 2022, explores the impact of firm productivity on carbon emissions, focusing specifically on regional differences. The results indicate that improvements in enterprise productivity contribute to a reduction in carbon emissions, suggesting that productivity gains drive economic growth while also serving as an effective strategy for emission reduction. From the perspective of heterogeneity analysis, regional differences play a significant role in the results. In addition, it is found that improvements in enterprise productivity are more effective in reducing carbon emissions in the eastern region. In contrast, in the central and western regions, the relatively insufficient technical and policy support means that improvements in corporate productivity do not have a significant impact on curbing carbon emissions. Based on the research conclusions, this paper demonstrates that enterprises adopt advanced green technologies for energy conservation, clean production, and pollution control to promote low-carbon processes. Increased R&D and innovation will boost technical capabilities and competitiveness. Besides, using digital tools to optimize production reduces waste, while promoting a circular economy reduces costs and environmental impact through resource recycling. In short, Chinese enterprises should invest in green innovation to address climate change and achieve carbon peak and neutrality goals.


References

[1]. Radulescu, M., et al. (2024) Energy efficiency and environmental regulations for mitigating carbon emissions in Chinese Provinces. Energy Efficiency 17, 67.

[2]. Cole, M.A., Elliott, R.J.R. and Zhang, J. (2013) Growth, foreign direct investment, and the environment: A study of the Chinese economy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66(1), 36-52.

[3]. Grossman, G.M. and Krueger, A.B. (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. NBER Working Paper No. 3914.

[4]. Stern, D.I. (2007) The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1439.

[5]. Fan, L.W., Pan, S.J., Liu, G.Q. and Zhou, P. (2017) Does energy efficiency affect financial performance? Evidence from Chinese energy-intensive firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 53-59.

[6]. Wang, P., et al. (2021) Environmental regulation, government subsidies, and green technology innovation—a provincial panel data analysis from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 11991.

[7]. Wang, Y. and Zhang, J. (2023) Corporate governance, media coverage, and corporate environmental protection investment: empirical evidence from listed companies in China’s high-pollution industries. Sustainability, 15(11), 8643.

[8]. Liu, Z., et al. (2025) Does the coupling of digital and green technology innovation matter for carbon emissions?. Journal of Environmental Management, 373, 123824.

[9]. Yang, H. and Zhu, X. (2022) Research on Green Innovation Performance of Manufacturing Industry and Its Improvement Path in China. Sustainability, 14(13), 8000.

[10]. Zhang, D., Rong, Z. and Ji, Q. (2019) Green innovation and firm performance: Evidence from listed companies in China. Resources, conservation and recycling, 144, 48-55.


Cite this article

Ruan,H. (2025). The Impact of Firm Productivity on Carbon Emissions: Evidence from Listed Companies in China. Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences,179,7-13.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.

Disclaimer/Publisher's Note

The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

About volume

Volume title: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Economic Management and Green Development

ISBN:978-1-80590-071-9(Print) / 978-1-80590-072-6(Online)
Editor:Florian Marcel Nuţă Nuţă
Conference website: https://2025.icemgd.org/
Conference date: 26 September 2025
Series: Advances in Economics, Management and Political Sciences
Volume number: Vol.179
ISSN:2754-1169(Print) / 2754-1177(Online)

© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open access policy for details).

References

[1]. Radulescu, M., et al. (2024) Energy efficiency and environmental regulations for mitigating carbon emissions in Chinese Provinces. Energy Efficiency 17, 67.

[2]. Cole, M.A., Elliott, R.J.R. and Zhang, J. (2013) Growth, foreign direct investment, and the environment: A study of the Chinese economy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66(1), 36-52.

[3]. Grossman, G.M. and Krueger, A.B. (1991) Environmental impacts of a North American free trade agreement. NBER Working Paper No. 3914.

[4]. Stern, D.I. (2007) The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1439.

[5]. Fan, L.W., Pan, S.J., Liu, G.Q. and Zhou, P. (2017) Does energy efficiency affect financial performance? Evidence from Chinese energy-intensive firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 53-59.

[6]. Wang, P., et al. (2021) Environmental regulation, government subsidies, and green technology innovation—a provincial panel data analysis from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 11991.

[7]. Wang, Y. and Zhang, J. (2023) Corporate governance, media coverage, and corporate environmental protection investment: empirical evidence from listed companies in China’s high-pollution industries. Sustainability, 15(11), 8643.

[8]. Liu, Z., et al. (2025) Does the coupling of digital and green technology innovation matter for carbon emissions?. Journal of Environmental Management, 373, 123824.

[9]. Yang, H. and Zhu, X. (2022) Research on Green Innovation Performance of Manufacturing Industry and Its Improvement Path in China. Sustainability, 14(13), 8000.

[10]. Zhang, D., Rong, Z. and Ji, Q. (2019) Green innovation and firm performance: Evidence from listed companies in China. Resources, conservation and recycling, 144, 48-55.