Evaluates the effect of Sponge City policies on land green use efficiency, suggesting sustainable urban practices.
Against the backdrop of rapid urbanization, urban land-resource use faces the dual challenge of improving efficiency while maintaining ecological sustainability. Enhancing urban land green use efficiency contributes to the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 11 and SDG 15. As an emerging governance approach for urban green infrastructure, the National Sponge City Policy (NSCP) aims to address urban waterlogging through nature-based solutions while improving land multifunctionality and ecological carrying capacity. Based on city-level panel data from 2005 to 2022, this study employs a difference-in-differences (DID) approach to identify the policy effect of the NSCP on ULGUE and further examines three transmission channels: innovation effects, infrastructure-support effects, and population-agglomeration effects. The novelty of this study lies in integrating the NSCP into the analytical framework of urban land green use efficiency, extending previous research that mainly focused on waterlogging control, water-resource management, and ecological benefits, and further developing a “policy intervention-factor reallocation-ULGUE improvement” mechanism pathway. The empirical results show that the NSCP significantly improves land green use efficiency in pilot areas, and this conclusion remains valid across multiple robustness checks. The mechanism analysis indicates that strengthened green innovation capacity, improved green infrastructure, and population agglomeration are key channels through which the policy effect is realized. Heterogeneity analysis further reveals that the policy effect varies across regions, dominant industrial structures, and industrial-base types. Overall, the NSCP promotes green spatial governance and efficient resource utilization, providing important institutional experience for coordinating ecological protection and urban development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: