Will economic development come at the cost of environmental pollution under fiscal pressure? evidence from...

The traditional view is that local governments are inclined to ease environmental regulations in response to fiscal pressure (FP) and alleviate FP by sacrificing the environment for economic development (ED). This paper takes Chinese Mainland resource-based cities (RBC) as the research sample but draws different conclusions. The research results are as follows: firstly, for RBC, although FP reduces environmental pollution (EP), it is not conducive to ED. Compared with non-resource-based cities (NRBC), the economic negative effect of FP in RBC is more obvious. Secondly, FP is detrimental to ED by reducing EP, and RBC have not sacrificed the environment to promote ED in the context of FP. This paper summarizes that the development path of RBC should be "optimizing government behavior → increasing FP → improving environmental quality → reducing ED level." Thirdly, the impact of FP on cities with slower economic growth and smaller economic gap is greater, and the impact of FP on cities with better environment is more obvious. This paper argues that facing FP, RBC in China will not trade EP for ED; at the same time, we suggest RBC in other countries in the face of the FP, not only thinking of promoting ED at the expense of the EP and ease the FP, but also the development of green ecological requirement, overall consideration of the relationship between EP and ED, and then achieve green and sustainable ED without degrading the environment as far as possible.