Open AccessEvidence of air quality data misreporting in China: An impulse indicator saturation model comparison of local government-reported and U.S. embassy-reported PM2.5 concentrations (2015–2017)
Author(s) -
Jesse S. Turiel,
Robert K. Kaufmann
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0249063
Subject(s) - china , air quality index , local government , econometrics , government (linguistics) , air pollution , impulse (physics) , statistics , geography , political science , economics , meteorology , mathematics , public administration , physics , law , chemistry , linguistics , philosophy , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics
This paper analyzes hourly PM 2.5 measurements from government-controlled and U.S. embassy-controlled monitoring stations in five Chinese cities between January 2015 and June 2017. We compare the two datasets with an impulse indicator saturation technique that identifies hours when the relation between Chinese and U.S. reported data diverges in a statistically significant fashion. These temporary divergences, or impulses, are 1) More frequent than expected by random chance; 2) More positive than expected by random chance; and 3) More likely to occur during hours when air pollution concentrations are high. In other words, relative to U.S.-controlled monitoring stations, government-controlled stations systematically under-report pollution levels when local air quality is poor. These results contrast with the findings of other recent studies, which argue that Chinese air quality data misreporting ended after a series of policy reforms beginning in 2012. Our findings provide evidence that local government misreporting did not end after 2012, but instead continued in a different manner. These results suggest that Chinese air quality data, while still useful, should not be taken entirely at face value.