Table 3.
Estimation results of the impact of tourism on carbon emissions.
| Model | SDM | SDEM | GNSM | OPM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tourism | 5.7728 * | 3.2639 * | 5.5860 * | 4.5892 ** |
| (1.82) | (1.73) | (1.75) | (2.40) | |
| Tourism2 | −0.0678 ** | −0.0577 *** | −0.0654 ** | −0.0711 *** |
| (−2.10) | (−2.58) | (−1.99) | (−3.12) | |
| Energy_con | 2.7144 | 2.2529 *** | 2.6729 | 2.3502 *** |
| (1.45) | (8.17) | (1.42) | (8.37) | |
| Energy_mix | −0.0488 ** | 2.9653 *** | −0.0483 ** | 3.1082 *** |
| (−2.21) | (4.67) | (−2.17) | (5.15) | |
| PGDP | 2.3445 *** | −0.9150 | 2.3631 *** | −0.8199 |
| (8.82) | (−1.48) | (8.80) | (−1.36) | |
| W*Tourism | 2.9775 *** | 7.8268 ** | 3.0156 *** | |
| (5.06) | (2.41) | (5.12) | ||
| W*Tourism2 | −0.8750 | −0.0899 *** | −0.8838 | |
| (−1.51) | (−2.73) | (−1.54) | ||
| W*y | 0.2834 *** | 0.3030 *** | ||
| (4.02) | (3.68) | |||
| W*u | 0.1802 ** | −0.0489 | ||
| (2.03) | (−0.43) | |||
| Log L | −2267.08 | −2272.58 | −2266.99 | |
| LR test | 0.19 | 11.18 *** | ||
| Province FE | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Year FE | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| N | 420 | 420 | 420 | 420 |
| Chi2 | 633.56 *** | 417.72 *** | 679.93 *** | - |
| R-Square | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.54 |
(1) the t-statistic of each coefficient was shown in brackets. (2) *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1. (3) “FE” represents fixed effect.