To further explore the green water resources utilization efficiency (WRUE) in this basin, a corresponding method was designed. First, a measurement index system for WRUE was studied and constructed. With this indicator system, the study introduced a data envelopment analysis model to analyze it, and then combined the relaxation variable analysis strategy to comprehensively analyze the accuracy of WRUE. The experiment outcomes indicated that in the WRUE of the Yellow River Basin (YRB), the pure technical UE changed the most and was in an effective utilization state. However, overall, the average values of scale efficiency and green UE within the basin were both below 1, indicating that it has not been fully utilized effectively. Besides, the average utilization efficiency of water resources in the upper, middle, and lower reaches was 0.51, 0.63, and 0.85, respectively. The analysis results prove that the measurement method designed in the research can effectively analyze the WRUE of the YRB, provide effective support for the efficient and circular development of the regional economy, and promote regional economic development.

  • Developed an index system to measure water resources efficiency in the Yellow River Basin.

  • Used data envelopment analysis and relaxation variable strategy for accurate efficiency analysis.

  • Pure technical efficiency changed significantly, showing effective utilization, while scale and green efficiency were underutilized.

  • The proposed method effectively supports circular economic development in the Yellow River Basin.

With the growth of population size and socio-economic conditions, various types of water consumption have sharply increased. Research shows that China's water resources utilization rate is only around 40%, while developed countries reach around 80% (Liu et al. 2023; Yoshe 2023). With the continuous increase in water demand and the intensification of climate change, the pressure on water resources utilization continues to rise. In addition, the extensive economic growth model has also brought serious water pollution problems to various regions, and the discrepancy between the supply and demand of water resources has emerged as a pivotal global concern. As an important economic zone, the Yellow River occupies an important position in the social and economic growth pattern of China. Promoting high-quality circular utilization of water resources in the Yellow River Basin (YRB) is an inherent necessity for promoting regional economic transformation and development and can also provide basic industries and energy security for national economic development. However, frequent water disasters, significant flood risks, fragile ecological environment, severe water resources security situation, and the need to improve development quality are prominent problems in the YRB (Yang et al. 2022). As the economy advances and population grows, the contradiction between the increasing requirement for water resources in the basin and the limited supply of water resources is becoming increasingly prominent. In the last few years, the interruption of water flow in the middle reach (MR) and lower reach (LR) of the YRB has been increasing, and the reasonable growth and utilization of its water resources have become increasingly difficult. This has led to the current shortage of water resources and environmental pollution in the YRB, which seriously restricts economic development. There are significant differences in the water resources utilization efficiency (WRUE) within the basin, and there is no coordination between resource utilization efficiency (UE) and economic development (Rong et al. 2021; Hu et al. 2023). Therefore, improving the green utilization efficiency (GE) of water resources in the YRB is an objective requirement to solve the problem of local water resources and facilitate sustainable development. Under the background of sustainable development, the measurement of WRUE has new economic and environmental significance and can provide new solutions for regional economic development.

Under the background of climate change, the issue of water shortage is becoming more grave, and enhancing the WRUE represents a crucial strategy for alleviating this problem. Li et al. used the super-directional distance function (Super-DDF) model to measure WRUE in the YRB. From the perspective of the whole basin, the digital economy raised WRUE. From a regional angle, the digital economy had a significant promoting effect on WRUE in the upper reach (UR) and MR of the Yellow River, and a restraining effect in the LR of the Yellow River, but the results were not significant (Li & Liang 2022). Zhang et al. used panel data from 30 provinces in China from 2006 to 2019 to study the impact of environmental regulation on green water efficiency. The results indicated that the WRUE in China was relatively low, and there were significant differences among provinces. Environmental regulation has a positive impact on the efficiency of national green water use. In view of regional variations, it can be seen that environmental regulation exerts a considerable positive impact on the efficiency of green water use in both the eastern and western regions (Zhang & Qiu 2022). Mu et al. used a multi-stage difference model to evaluate the impact of water resources taxes on WRUE. The results indicated that water resources policies could effectively improve the WRUE by optimizing resource allocation. Besides, spatial heterogeneity analysis denoted that the water resources tax policy had a stronger effect on raising the WRUE in the eastern region of China than in the central and western regions (Mu et al. 2022).

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) employs linear programming to assess the comparative efficacy of comparable units of the same type. It is widely used in solving various efficiency problems. Liang et al. combined DEA and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methods to propose the WRUE index (WEI) to assess the WRUE of various regions in the Tumen River Basin. Quantitative analysis was conducted on domestic, agricultural, and industrial water UE in the Three Gorges Reservoir area using the DEA-Charnes, Cooper, and Rhodes (CCR) model. The findings indicated that from 2014 to 2019, the WEI values of most areas along the ‘the Belt and Road’ showed an upward trend (Liang et al. 2022). Wang et al. measured the WRUE of 30 provinces in China using a DEA model and then analyzed the influence of environmental regulations on regional WRUE in China using the generalized method of moments (GMM) model. The outcomes denoted that the overall WRUE was low, and regional WRUE was unbalanced. The areas with higher efficiency were concentrated in the east, while the areas with lower efficiency were concentrated in the west. Weak environmental regulation intensity was not conducive to improving WRUE (Wang & Wang 2021). Fu et al. used Mann–Kendall and multiple linear regression analysis to study the regional and temporal dynamic changes in WRUE in China. According to research results, the annual average water use efficiency in China from 2000 to 2017 was 0.998 gC/mm·m2. The results of this study may help China select appropriate regional vegetation and sustainably manage local water resources (Fu et al. 2024). Shi et al. investigated the impact of China's new urbanization development on industrial water efficiency. On this basis, a spatial econometric model and a panel threshold model were constructed to explore the spatial spillover effects and threshold characteristics of new urbanization development on industrial water use efficiency. The results indicate that the development of new urbanization presents a significant positive spatial correlation and has a positive spillover effect on the improvement of industrial water use efficiency (Shi et al. 2023). Liang et al. assessed the industrial water UE of more than 200 cities in the Chinese Mainland from 2012 to 2016 under the slack-based measure (SBM) model and analyzed the industrial water use efficiency of China from the urban level. Subsequently, the Tobit regression model was employed to ascertain the pivotal determinants of industrial water UE from the vantage points of natural, social, municipal, and industrial structural factors. The outcomes indicated that per capita gross domestic product (GDP), the total length of drainage pipelines, and the presence in coastal areas had a considerable positive influence on WRUE, whereas the proportion of the secondary industry to GDP had a considerable negative impact (Liang & Zhou 2022).

In summary, extensive research has been conducted on the WRUE, including the impact of the digital economy on WRUE in the YRB, the impact of environmental regulation on green water use efficiency, and the impact of water resource taxes on WRUE. Various factors have been analyzed for the WRUE in different regions. However, these influencing factors are all singular and isolated from other factors during the analysis process. Previous studies have failed to effectively consider multiple influencing indicators when analyzing WRUE, and the analysis results obtained need further optimization. To address this issue, the study first constructs a measurement index for WRUE and then combines DEA and SBM to construct a calculation model for WRUE based on DEA-SBM. It comprehensively considers the impact of multiple factors on UE, while also taking into account the influence of expected and unexpected output factors on WRUE, to achieve a more accurate and effective analysis of the UE of green water resources in the YRB, and facilitate the sustainable development of regional economic circulation.

The study designed a method for measuring the WRUE in the YRB. First, the first section constructed measurement indicators for WRUE and comprehensively analyzed the input and output of WRUE. Secondly, in the second section, a measurement model for WRUE was constructed with the DEA model, and an SBM model with non-radial and non-angle was introduced to comprehensively consider the unexpected outputs in the output factors.

Construction of measurement indicators for green WRUE

To better analyze the efficiency of green water resource utilization in the YRB, this study first collected and organized relevant sample data. This study mainly focuses on nine provinces that flow through the YRB. Given that the analysis object, namely the WRUE in the YRB, has certain spatiotemporal characteristics, this study adopts a systematic sampling method to ensure that the selected samples can cover the spatiotemporal variation characteristics within the region. This study uses a systematic sampling method to analyze relevant data from 2011 to 2022 as samples. First, the collected data are processed to correct outliers and missing values. Then, the data are classified based on characteristics such as time and region. Finally, all data are normalized to facilitate subsequent analysis. The relevant indicator data are all from the ‘China Environmental Statistical Yearbook’, ‘China Statistical Yearbook’, and the ‘Water Resources Bulletin’ of various provinces and cities in the YRB (Li et al. 2022).

The YRB is one of China's ecological basins, playing an important role in promoting economic growth and maintaining ecological balance. Although the YRB is rich in water resources, its UE is low, which greatly restricts the economic development within the basin. Therefore, achieving efficient recycling of water resources in the YRB is a critical measure to realize high-quality regional economic growth and maintain ecological balance. According to the relevant data provided by the YRB Water Resources Bulletin, the proportion of water resources in the YRB in recent years is shown in Figure 1 (Zhang et al. 2023).
Figure 1

Water resources allocation in the YRB.

Figure 1

Water resources allocation in the YRB.

Close modal
The WRUE refers to the proportion of inputting and outputting of water resources and other related factors. Among them, water consumption, land, agricultural machinery, human capital, fixed capital stock, etc. are included. The green WRUE mainly includes economic, social, and ecological environmental protection efficiencies. When analyzing the green WRUE, the first is to construct an efficiency measurement index system for green water resources. To better fit the actual utilization of water resources in the YRB and reduce the influence of subjective factors, this study determines measurement indicators from the perspective of input–output. In this dimension, water resource utilization is considered as a production activity, while water resources themselves, invested capital, and invested human resources are considered as input indicators. The regional GDP of the region is the output indicator, and its output factors should take into account economic benefits and ecological efficiency. First, it calculates the hidden water resources consumption in daily consumption and various products and services, namely water footprint, as shown in the following formula (Tama & Vicente 2023).
(1)

In formula (1), T means the total water footprint, T1 represents the polluted water footprint, T2 represents the water footprint of the domestic and ecological environment, T3 represents the water footprint of agricultural, forestry, and animal husbandry products, and T4 represents the water footprint of industrial products. In human resources indicators, relevant practitioners are applied to measure the actual labor input in the production process. Based on the health, social services, and education-related data released by the National Bureau of Statistics over the years, this study uses the society development index (SDI) to measure the social development and improvement of people's livelihoods in the YRB region (Li et al. 2023). The indicator system is denoted in Table 1.

Table 1

Social development index system

Primary indicatorsSecondary indicators
Urbanization level a1 The proportion of non-agricultural population 
Development level of science and education a2 The proportion of science and education expenditure in fiscal expenditure 
Proportion of medical resources a3 Number of doctors per million population 
Level of education a4 The proportion of population with associate degree or above 
Population size a5 Natural population growth rate 
Primary indicatorsSecondary indicators
Urbanization level a1 The proportion of non-agricultural population 
Development level of science and education a2 The proportion of science and education expenditure in fiscal expenditure 
Proportion of medical resources a3 Number of doctors per million population 
Level of education a4 The proportion of population with associate degree or above 
Population size a5 Natural population growth rate 

In Table 1, indicators such as a1, a2, a3, and a4 can effectively promote social development, while population indicators are more reasonable and beneficial to social development. The relationship between population, social resources, and economic development level should be in a relatively balanced and stable state. The normalization calculation of indicators such as a1, a2, a3, and a4 is shown in the following formula (Peter et al. 2024).
(2)
In formula (2), Aij represents the initial value of the ith indicator in the jth year. represents the normalized result of Aij. Ai represents the initial value of the ith indicator, and Max(Xi) means the max value of the ith indicator. The normalization of population a5 is shown in the following formula (Deng & Zhang 2023).
(3)
In formula (3), Min(Xi) means the mini value of the ith indicator. The expected output of SDI is shown in the following formula (Zhang et al. 2021).
(4)
In formula (4), represents the normalized value of evaluation indicators for the region during a certain time period, n means the amount of indicators, and I means the social development status value of the regional system during a certain time period. The larger the I, the stronger the social development ability. In capital investment, it is necessary to calculate the capital stock, as shown in the following formula (Abba Haruna et al. 2022).
(5)
In formula (5), Kt,r represents the capital stock of r region during the r time period. γt represents the capital depreciation rate, and represents the new fixed assets investment of r region during the r time period. According to the analysis approach of existing research, the gray water (GW) footprint generated in industrial and agricultural production as well as in daily life is considered as an unexpected output, as shown in the following formula.
(6)

In formula (6), Unex represents the total amount of undesired GW footprint, B1 represents industrial GW, B2 represents domestic GW, and B3 represents agricultural GW footprint. Based on the above indicator analysis, the selection of input and output variables is based on principles such as scientific rigor, systematicity, practical needs, and feasibility, while also referring to the indicator system constructed in existing research. After a comprehensive analysis, the following indicator system is obtained. The indicator system for measuring the green WRUE in the YRB is shown in Table 2 (Zhe & Tonghui 2023).

Table 2

Index system for measuring WRUE in the YRB

IndexVariableVariable declaration
Input Water resources Total water consumption/billion m3 
Capital Related practitioners/10,000 people 
Human resources Fixed asset investment/0.01 billion US$ 
Expected output Economic benefits Total output value/0.01 billion US$ 
The completeness of the management system Various policies and regulations related to water resource utilization 
Public awareness of water conservation Public awareness of rational utilization of water resources 
Ecological benefit The positive impact on the ecosystem. 
Undesirable output Water pollution Total/billion m3 
Over-exploitation of water resources Exceeding the renewable and carrying capacity of water resources 
Ecological damage Damage caused to the structure of aquatic ecosystems 
Carbon emission Total carbon emissions/10,000 tons 
IndexVariableVariable declaration
Input Water resources Total water consumption/billion m3 
Capital Related practitioners/10,000 people 
Human resources Fixed asset investment/0.01 billion US$ 
Expected output Economic benefits Total output value/0.01 billion US$ 
The completeness of the management system Various policies and regulations related to water resource utilization 
Public awareness of water conservation Public awareness of rational utilization of water resources 
Ecological benefit The positive impact on the ecosystem. 
Undesirable output Water pollution Total/billion m3 
Over-exploitation of water resources Exceeding the renewable and carrying capacity of water resources 
Ecological damage Damage caused to the structure of aquatic ecosystems 
Carbon emission Total carbon emissions/10,000 tons 

According to the analysis results, basic indicators for measuring WRUE are obtained, which comprehensively consider expected and unexpected output factors under input factors, thus comprehensively measuring the effective utilization of water resources.

Construction of a green WRUE measurement model based on DEA-SBM

Based on the constructed WRUE measurement indicators, corresponding measurement models are constructed to analyze the green WRUE. In the analysis of WRUE, the DEA method is used for analysis. DEA is a non-parametric method for efficiency measurement, which has a wide range of applications and can simultaneously consider multiple input and output indicators, thus more comprehensively reflecting the efficiency changes of the research object. Compared with parametric methods, the significant advantage of this method is that it does not need to consider the distribution of indicator weights and has better operability in efficiency measurement. It is broadly applied in solving multi-input and multi-output issues. In DEA analysis, the research object is called decision making unit (DMU), and its core idea is to use a linear programming method to determine the production front of each DMU, and then measure relative effectiveness based on the degree of deviation of the DMU from the production front. The quantitative result of this relative effectiveness is the efficiency value of the target object, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2

Principle of DEA analysis.

Figure 2

Principle of DEA analysis.

Close modal
In Figure 2(a), X1 and X2, respectively, represent two input factors. B is an effective DMU on the front surface of SS', R' is an inefficient DMU, and WW' is an efficient DMU. In the basic theory of the DEA model, E represents the number of DMUs, and D represents a certain decision unit. Therefore, DEA can be obtained as shown in the following formula.
(7)
In formula (7), n means the amount of DMU in the production system, θ represents the relative efficiency of DMU, λ represents a constant vector, and u represents the uth DMU. xu represents the input factor, yu represents the output factor. Formula (7) represents the DEA model under the condition of constant returns to scale (CRS), where E represents a constant vector. If θ is 1, it indicates that the DMU is above the production front, as shown in the variable returns to scale (VRS) front in Figure 3. If θ ≤ 1, the relative efficiency value of the DMU is invalid (Farzadi et al. 2023). When the VRS changes, DEA is shown in the following formula.
(8)
Figure 3

Schematic diagram of DMU.

Figure 3

Schematic diagram of DMU.

Close modal

In formula (8), is the constraint condition added when the return to scale changes, which is the front line of CRS. The frontier forms under the above two conditions are shown in Figure 3.

In Figure 3, CRS and VRS represent the two frontier forms of the DEA model, with points X1 and X2 as the input vectors. V1, V2, V3, and V4 all represent corresponding DMU. From formulas (7) and (8), it can be seen that the above two formulas are based on the basic return to scale condition, that is, the production system can obtain the maximum output return under certain input conditions of production factors. However, according to the constructed efficiency measurement index system and the actual water resources utilization situation, not all output factors are better with more. In the DEA model, the elements that are not expected to produce are called ‘unexpected outputs’. However, traditional DEA models do not take into account the impact of ‘unexpected output elements’, which affects the measurement of WRUE. To address this issue, the study considers using an SBM model with non-radial and non-angle to analyze the unexpected output factors in the WRUE in the Yellow River. SBM model can effectively consider the impact of slack variables on efficiency results, that is, the gap between the actual and the optimal inputs or outputs. At the same time, the model can take into account the impact of non-expected outputs (such as environmental pollution, waste, etc.) on efficiency, ensuring a more comprehensive and accurate efficiency analysis. The measurement of urban WRUE is a relatively complex multi-input and multi-output process, which involves various production factors. The output is not only expected economic and social benefits but also unexpected environmental pollution and damage. The SBM model is used to analyze unexpected output factors, dividing the output of DMU into expected and unexpected outputs. First, input and output are defined separately, and the input for each DMU is shown in the following formula (Meng et al. 2022).
(9)
In formula (9), X and Y represent inputting and outputting vectors, respectively, and X > 0 and Y > 0, from which the production value P can be obtained as shown in the following formula (Rdder et al. 2022).
(10)
DMU breaks output into expected and unexpected output, as shown in the following formula (Shahsavan et al. 2022).
(11)
In formula (11), yg > 0, yb > 0. With the above analysis, the unexpected output based on SBM is shown in the following formula.
(12)

In formula (12), and represent the number of DMUs invested. g, b represent the number of variables, and Sg and Sb, respectively, represent slack variables. After considering unexpected outputs comprehensively, the computational effectiveness of WRUE can be further optimized.

Based on relevant data analysis, the study first constructs a measurement index system for WRUE. Based on this indicator system, research constructs a DAE-SBM model for specific analysis and calculation of WRUE. The limitation of this method design lies in simplifying complex water resource systems, ignoring the impact of some less prominent factors on WRUE, and only considering key factors.

The study first introduced the sources of experimental data in the first section and conducted a significance test on the constructed indicator parameters, verifying the effectiveness of the selected indicators in the study. Then, using the research-designed DAE-SBM model, the UE and spatiotemporal differentiation of water resources in the YRB were analyzed, and the characteristics of the UE and spatiotemporal distribution of green water resources in the YRB were obtained.

Analysis of WRUE

To analyze the WRUE in the YRB, a WRUE measurement method based on an improved DEA model was designed on the basis of constructing UE measurement indicators. MaxDea8.0 was used to measure the WRUE in the YRB. The WRUE of provinces flowing through the YRB were analyzed, including Qinghai, Sichuan and other provinces. Using the period of 2011–2022 as the research time range, all input and output indicator data were from the China Environmental Statistical Yearbook and the China Statistical Yearbook (Mingyue et al. 2023). First, to explore the impact of each variable on efficiency analysis, sensitivity analysis was conducted in this study. The analysis results are shown in Table 3. From Table 3, among the input factors, the public awareness of water conservation and the completeness of the management system had little impact on the WRUE, while water resource and economic benefits had a significant impact on the UE.

Table 3

Results of the sensitivity analysis

VariablesWeight ratioSensitivity
Water resource 0.25 1.25 
Capital 0.16 1.41 
Human resources 0.03 0.52 
Economic benefits 0.21 1.57 
The completeness of the management system 0.01 0.42 
Public awareness of water conservation 0.01 0.21 
Ecological benefit 0.16 0.86 
Water pollution 0.06 0.57 
Over-exploitation of water resources 0.08 0.35 
Ecological damage 0.09 0.57 
Carbon emission 0.04 0.42 
VariablesWeight ratioSensitivity
Water resource 0.25 1.25 
Capital 0.16 1.41 
Human resources 0.03 0.52 
Economic benefits 0.21 1.57 
The completeness of the management system 0.01 0.42 
Public awareness of water conservation 0.01 0.21 
Ecological benefit 0.16 0.86 
Water pollution 0.06 0.57 
Over-exploitation of water resources 0.08 0.35 
Ecological damage 0.09 0.57 
Carbon emission 0.04 0.42 

The GE of water resources was broken into pure technical efficiency (PTE) and scale efficiency (SE), as denoted in Figure 4. From Figure 4, during the period of 2011–2022, the PTE of water resources in the YRB changed the most. From 2011 to 2022, it sharply decreased, but its average UE was greater than 1, indicating that it was in an effective utilization state. However, overall, the average values of SE and GE within the watershed were both below 1, indicating that it has not been fully utilized effectively. The PTE was significantly higher than the GE and SE. This indicated that the GE of water resources in the YRB has not been optimized, and relevant technologies should be further optimized to improve UE.
Figure 4

Changes in WRUE between 2011 and 2022.

Figure 4

Changes in WRUE between 2011 and 2022.

Close modal

The green WRUE in each province during this time period is shown in Table 4. Based on the data shown in Table 3, the average WRUE of Sichuan and Shaanxi was below 0.6, indicating low UE. In Qinghai, Gansu, and Henan provinces, some years had UE higher than 1, while most years had UE lower than 1. The overall WRUE of each province ranged from 0.3 to 1.2, and its UE could be further optimized. The WRUE in Inner Mongolia, Shanxi, and Shandong was all above 1, indicating an effective utilization state.

Table 4

WRUE of various provinces in the YRB

TimeQinghaiSichuanGansuNingxiaInner MongoliaShaanxiShanxiHenanShandong
2011 0.8672 0.4673 0.7292 0.3566 1.1209 0.5263 1.0213 0.9667 1.2341 
2012 0.8496 0.4236 0.7643 0.3341 1.2265 0.4578 1.1104 0.6752 1.1206 
2013 0.9520 0.4786 0.7125 0.3895 1.2305 0.5697 1.0320 0.8705 1.3467 
2014 1.0624 0.5230 0.5629 0.4216 1.2352 0.4471 1.0674 1.1052 1.0585 
2015 1.1352 0.5416 0.5631 0.4458 1.0645 0.4692 1.1223 1.0654 1.2340 
2016 1.2204 0.4132 0.8714 0.3894 1.1164 0.5307 1.1508 0.7602 1.1124 
2017 1.0305 0.4415 1.0724 0.3657 1.0652 0.5402 1.1316 0.8964 1.0462 
2018 0.9864 0.6287 1.1426 0.4216 1.2506 0.4087 1.2013 0.7857 1.3521 
2019 0.9506 0.5672 0.8954 0.2362 1.3245 0.3694 1.0234 0.0741 1.0352 
2020 0.7126 0.5718 0.826 0.3694 1.0128 0.601 1.2401 1.0687 1.3206 
2021 0.8302 0.4698 0.7395 0.4586 1.2681 0.5366 1.0657 1.0142 1.1937 
2022 0.8970 0.5983 0.8144 0.5127 1.0693 0.5682 1.0571 1.0846 1.2068 
Average 0.9578 0.5104 0.8081 0.3918 1.1654 0.5021 1.1020 0.8639 1.1884 
TimeQinghaiSichuanGansuNingxiaInner MongoliaShaanxiShanxiHenanShandong
2011 0.8672 0.4673 0.7292 0.3566 1.1209 0.5263 1.0213 0.9667 1.2341 
2012 0.8496 0.4236 0.7643 0.3341 1.2265 0.4578 1.1104 0.6752 1.1206 
2013 0.9520 0.4786 0.7125 0.3895 1.2305 0.5697 1.0320 0.8705 1.3467 
2014 1.0624 0.5230 0.5629 0.4216 1.2352 0.4471 1.0674 1.1052 1.0585 
2015 1.1352 0.5416 0.5631 0.4458 1.0645 0.4692 1.1223 1.0654 1.2340 
2016 1.2204 0.4132 0.8714 0.3894 1.1164 0.5307 1.1508 0.7602 1.1124 
2017 1.0305 0.4415 1.0724 0.3657 1.0652 0.5402 1.1316 0.8964 1.0462 
2018 0.9864 0.6287 1.1426 0.4216 1.2506 0.4087 1.2013 0.7857 1.3521 
2019 0.9506 0.5672 0.8954 0.2362 1.3245 0.3694 1.0234 0.0741 1.0352 
2020 0.7126 0.5718 0.826 0.3694 1.0128 0.601 1.2401 1.0687 1.3206 
2021 0.8302 0.4698 0.7395 0.4586 1.2681 0.5366 1.0657 1.0142 1.1937 
2022 0.8970 0.5983 0.8144 0.5127 1.0693 0.5682 1.0571 1.0846 1.2068 
Average 0.9578 0.5104 0.8081 0.3918 1.1654 0.5021 1.1020 0.8639 1.1884 

The research analyzed the WRUE from the perspectives of economy, environment, and GE. The result is shown in Figure 5. From Figure 5, the horizontal axis denotes WRUE, and the vertical axis represents kernel density, which can intuitively reflect the distribution changes of discrete measurement values in a continuous area (Guo et al. 2023). The study selected kernel density from 2011, 2016, and 2021, and analyzed the approximate evolution trend of WRUE in the YRB based on the trend of these 3 years. The WRUE showed a single peak shape and gradually converged. According to changes in nuclear density, the proportion of areas with lower WRUE was continuously decreasing, while the proportion of areas with higher WRUE was gradually increasing.
Figure 5

Changes in kernel density of WRUE.

Figure 5

Changes in kernel density of WRUE.

Close modal

The Malmquist index is an indicator utilized to evaluate the dynamic changes in DMU total factor productivity (TFP). The study used it to evaluate the changes in the TFP index of WRUE in the YRB. According to Table 5, the average TFP was 1.078, which showed a decreasing trend in 2014 and 2015. The overall WRUE of the nine provinces in the YRB denoted an upward trend. The technology UE was relatively low, with an average annual rate of less than 1 in 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021, and 2022. Technological changes decreased significantly in 2012 and 2013, while also showing a declining trend in 2016. The efficiency of scale declined significantly in 2014 and 2015. This indicated that the water resources technology of various provinces in the YRB needs to be further improved, and their scale production can also be further enhanced. The optimization of technology UE can be carried out from two aspects: PTE and SE.

Table 5

Malmquist evaluation of water resources

TimeTechnology UETechnological changesPTE changeSETFP
2011 1.012 1.123 1.009 0.926 1.099 
2012 1.034 0.926 1.193 1.051 1.026 
2013 1.112 0.889 1.101 0.906 1.197 
2014 0.957 1.134 0.967 0.881 0.895 
2015 1.026 1.175 0.942 0.876 0.994 
2016 0.897 0.895 1.237 1.064 1.075 
2017 0.889 1.105 1.039 1.041 1.064 
2018 0.897 1.105 0.946 1.108 1.113 
2019 1.012 1.123 1.043 1.050 1.106 
2020 1.031 1.219 1.122 0.953 1.207 
2021 0.991 1.064 1.099 0.956 1.056 
2022 0.967 1.094 1.076 0.968 1.105 
Average 0.985 1.071 1.065 0.982 1.078 
TimeTechnology UETechnological changesPTE changeSETFP
2011 1.012 1.123 1.009 0.926 1.099 
2012 1.034 0.926 1.193 1.051 1.026 
2013 1.112 0.889 1.101 0.906 1.197 
2014 0.957 1.134 0.967 0.881 0.895 
2015 1.026 1.175 0.942 0.876 0.994 
2016 0.897 0.895 1.237 1.064 1.075 
2017 0.889 1.105 1.039 1.041 1.064 
2018 0.897 1.105 0.946 1.108 1.113 
2019 1.012 1.123 1.043 1.050 1.106 
2020 1.031 1.219 1.122 0.953 1.207 
2021 0.991 1.064 1.099 0.956 1.056 
2022 0.967 1.094 1.076 0.968 1.105 
Average 0.985 1.071 1.065 0.982 1.078 

Analysis of spatiotemporal characteristics of green WRUE

To further study the spatiotemporal distribution features of green water resources in the YRB, an analysis was organized on the WRUE in the UR, MR, and LR of the YRB. The UR of the YRB includes Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, Ningxia, and Inner Mongolia. In the MR, there are Shaanxi and Shanxi. The LRs mainly include Henan and Shandong provinces. From Figure 6, there were significant differences in WRUE between the three reaches of the YRB, that is, there were significant spatial utilization differences in each section. On average, the average WRUE in the UR, MR, and LR was 0.51, 0.63, and 0.85, respectively. In addition, as time progressed, the UE of each segment showed an upward trend.
Figure 6

Utilization efficiency of the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the YRB [drawn by the author].

Figure 6

Utilization efficiency of the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the YRB [drawn by the author].

Close modal

To further analyze the spatiotemporal differentiation in WRUE in the UR, water resources, and LR of the YRB, a detailed analysis was conducted on the internal differences in WRUE. The contribution rates of each part to the overall UE were analyzed separately, and the results are denoted in Table 6. Overall, the contribution rate of green efficiency of water resources in the UR, MR, and LR of the Yellow River was ranked from high to low in the LR, water resources, and UR. Compared to the MR and LR, the UR was significantly lower. The contribution rate range of the UR was 7.94%, while the contribution rate range of the MR was 16.9% and the LR contribution rate range was 26.51%. The contribution rates of each region were relatively stable in the time dimension.

Table 6

Contribution rate of green efficiency of water resources in the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the Yellow River

TimeUpper (%)Middle (%)Lower (%)
2011 3.49 44.77 34.22 
2012 5.17 43.31 41.60 
2013 10.46 38.39 43.29 
2014 11.43 39.57 38.77 
2015 9.35 44.76 55.38 
2016 7.39 46.27 51.08 
2017 6.87 35.49 60.73 
2018 8.64 38.89 41.56 
2019 10.36 43.38 56.45 
2020 8.78 29.37 49.09 
2021 9.28 38.55 41.39 
2022 11.06 45.34 37.97 
Contribution rate range 7.94 16.9 26.51 
TimeUpper (%)Middle (%)Lower (%)
2011 3.49 44.77 34.22 
2012 5.17 43.31 41.60 
2013 10.46 38.39 43.29 
2014 11.43 39.57 38.77 
2015 9.35 44.76 55.38 
2016 7.39 46.27 51.08 
2017 6.87 35.49 60.73 
2018 8.64 38.89 41.56 
2019 10.36 43.38 56.45 
2020 8.78 29.37 49.09 
2021 9.28 38.55 41.39 
2022 11.06 45.34 37.97 
Contribution rate range 7.94 16.9 26.51 

A comprehensive assessment of WRUE in the YRB was conducted from three perspectives: scale, structure, and efficiency. The outcomes are indicated in Figure 7. In Figure 7(a), the scale, structure, and efficiency of economic development in the YRB all denoted an upward trend. By 2022, the comprehensive score was 0.65. According to Figure 7(b), the various dimensions of water resources utilization in the YRB maintained a relatively stable trend, with a comprehensive score of 0.68 by 2022. Overall, the trend of changes in WRUE was basically consistent with the trend of changes in economic growth level, showing an upward trend.
Figure 7

Comprehensive evaluation of water resources utilization system [drawn by the author].

Figure 7

Comprehensive evaluation of water resources utilization system [drawn by the author].

Close modal

To further validate the performance of DEA-SBM, it was compared with other models, including the CCR model, AHP, and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation (FCE) method. The comparative analysis between DEA-SBM and other models is shown in Table 7. In Table 7, the F1 score of the DEA-SBM model reached 0.93, with an accuracy of 0.92, a recall rate of 0.93, and an Areas Under the Curve (AUC) as high as 0.95, indicating that the model has high accuracy and reliability in efficiency analysis tasks. In contrast, although the CCR model, AHP, and FCE model also performed well, they were slightly inferior to the DEA-SBM model in all indicators. This further proved the superior performance of the research method.

Table 7

Comparative analysis of DEA-SBM and other models

Performance metricCCRAHPFCEDEA-SBM
F1 score 0.90 0.85 0.84 0.93 
Precision 0.86 0.83 0.87 0.92 
Recall 0.91 0.78 0.82 0.93 
AUC 0.87 0.88 0.91 0.95 
Performance metricCCRAHPFCEDEA-SBM
F1 score 0.90 0.85 0.84 0.93 
Precision 0.86 0.83 0.87 0.92 
Recall 0.91 0.78 0.82 0.93 
AUC 0.87 0.88 0.91 0.95 

Finally, the significance of the obtained analysis results was analyzed, and the results are shown in Table 8. In the table, there is a clear correlation between each result and the research object, which has varying degrees of impact on WRUE and can effectively reflect the reliability of the results.

Table 8

Significance analysis of results

IndexStandard errortSig
Kernel density 0.864 3.258 0.000 
Malmquist index 0.568 4.562 0.000 
Contribution rate (upper) 0.306 2.956 0.000 
Contribution rate (middle) 0.267 4.332 0.000 
Contribution rate (lower) 0.125 3.594 0.000 
IndexStandard errortSig
Kernel density 0.864 3.258 0.000 
Malmquist index 0.568 4.562 0.000 
Contribution rate (upper) 0.306 2.956 0.000 
Contribution rate (middle) 0.267 4.332 0.000 
Contribution rate (lower) 0.125 3.594 0.000 

To better analyze the WRUE in the YRB, the study first constructed a corresponding indicator system. On this basis, researchers designed a WRUE measurement model based on DEA and optimized it using the SBM model. The experiment outcomes denoted that the average WRUE in Sichuan, and Shaanxi in the YRB was less than 0.6, indicating low UE. This may be related to the overall allocation, utilization, and investment ratio of water resources in the region. If the input ratio is high but the output efficiency is low, it directly reduces the UE of regional green water resources. In Qinghai, Gansu, and Henan provinces, some years had UE higher than 1, while most years had UE lower than 1. The overall WRUE of each province ranged from 0.3 to 1.2. From the perspective of spatial differences, water resources in different regions contributed to the utilization of green water resources in the YRB to varying degrees. Specifically, the contribution rate of green WRUE in the UR, water resources, and LR was ranked from high to low in the LR, MR, and UR. In contrast to the MR and LR, the UR was significantly lower. The contribution rate of the UR was extremely poor at 7.94%, while the contribution rate of the MR was extremely poor at 16.9%, and the LR contribution rate was extremely poor at 26.51%. The contribution rates of each region were relatively stable in the time dimension. This may be because the overall economic development level of the upstream and downstream regions is relatively higher, which allows the invested resources to be better converted into economic benefits. Similarly, the economic development level in the MR and UR of the region was slightly lower than that in the LR, which led to lower efficiency in the transformation of economic benefits. Therefore, under the same investment ratio, LR regions might achieve better efficiency in utilizing green resources, resulting in a higher contribution rate. The scale, structure, and efficiency of economic development in the YRB were basically consistent with the trend of changes in WRUE, showing an upward trend. The UE of green water resources in the YRB met the economic development needs of the region and could achieve a balance between the growing economic development needs and green environmental development to a certain extent.

By analyzing the UE of green water resources in the YRB, the dynamic changes in the UE of green water resources in the basin over the years can be effectively analyzed, providing a reference for subsequent water conservation and environmental protection work. Secondly, the research results can provide effective suggestions for the future utilization of green water resources in the basin, further improving UE and promoting regional sustainable development. In addition, the research results can effectively provide useful guidance for the sustainable utilization of water resources in the YRB.

There are still shortcomings in the research. This study comprehensively considers the measurement indicators of the social development index, but the exploration of how this index specifically affects the efficiency of green water resource utilization is relatively insufficient. Second, how to further improve the UE of green water resources is also a direction that needs to be further explored in the future. Potential sources of bias in research include data collection and processing, as well as the use of stakeholders, which may have an impact on the accuracy of analysis results.

There are relatively significant differences in economic growth among different reaches in the YRB, and there are also significant differences in the demand for water resources. To explore the UE of green water resources in the YRB, a measurement method for green WRUE based on DEA-SBM was designed. Moreover, relevant data from 2011 to 2022 were used for statistical analysis. The experimental results showed that there were significant temporal and spatial differentiations in the WRUE in the YRB. From a spatial perspective, the UE of LR regions was higher than that of MR and UR regions. The contribution rates of green efficiency of water resources in the basin, from high to low, were LR, MR, and UR. In terms of time, from 2011 to 2022, the UE showed an increasing trend. In addition, the scale, structure, and efficiency of economic development in the YRB were basically consistent with the trend of changes in WRUE, showing an overall upward trend. However, there are still shortcomings in the research. In the analysis of the indicator system, more unexpected output factors can be taken into account to further optimize the calculation accuracy of WRUE. In addition, future research can further explore the specific mechanisms for improving the efficiency of green water resource utilization.

This research was supported by Henan Provincial Key R&D and Extension Special Project 2023: Study on the Measurement of Water Resources Utilization Efficiency and Spatial and Temporal Patterns in the Yellow River Basin under Environmental Constraints. (232400411180).

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Abba Haruna
A.
,
Muhammad
L. J.
&
Abubakar
M.
(
2022
)
Novel thermal-aware green scheduling in grid environment
,
Artificial Intelligence and Applications
,
4
(
1
),
244
251
.
Deng
M.
&
Zhang
T.
(
2023
)
Spatial-temporal evolution of water resources utilization efficiency in Jiangsu province
,
Water Science & Technology: Water Supply
,
23
(
5/6
),
2539
2552
.
Farzadi
E.
,
Hadi-Vencheh
A.
&
Beigi
Y. G. A.
(
2023
)
Multiplicative non-parametric models with interval ratio data: Application to the banking industry
,
RAIRO Operations Research
,
57
(
5
),
2315
2330
.
Fu
Y.
,
Jian
S.
&
Yu
X.
(
2024
)
Water use efficiency in China is impacted by climate change and land use and land cover
,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
,
31
(
30
),
42840
42856
.
Hu
M.
,
Chen
L.
&
Yuan
J.
(
2023
)
Green water resources utilization efficiency in urban agglomerations: Measurement, spatiotemporal variations and influencing factors
,
Journal of Resources and Ecology
,
14
(
6
),
1176
1191
.
Li
Y.
&
Liang
H.
(
2022
)
Influence of digital economy on water resources utilization efficiency in the Yellow River basin and its mechanism
,
Industrial Technology & Economy
,
41
(
7
),
21
27
.
Li
Y.
,
Du
X.
&
Zhang
L. X.
(
2022
)
Research on the safe utilization of agricultural water resources in the Yellow River basin
,
Water Science & Technology: Water Supply
,
22
(
5
),
5281
5294
.
Liang
X.
&
Zhou
Z.
(
2022
)
Technical efficiency measurement of urban industrial water: A case study of cities in China
,
Management of Environmental Quality
,
33
(
4
),
1046
1060
.
Liang
X. D.
,
Li
J. C.
,
Guo
G. X.
,
Li
S. P.
&
Gong
Q. X.
(
2022
)
Urban water resources utilization efficiency based on SBM-undesirable–Gini coefficient–kernel density in Gansu Province, China
.
Environment, Development and Sustainability
,
25
(
11
),
13015
13034
.
Liu
W. H.
,
Wang
Y. Z.
,
Huang
J. K.
&
Zhu
W. B.
(
2023
)
Assessment on the sustainability of water resources utilization in Central Asia based on water resources carrying capacity
,
Journal of Geographical Sciences
,
33
(
10
),
1967
1988
.
Meng
X. L.
,
Gong
L. T.
,
Wei
X.
&
Yao
J. C.
(
2022
)
An evaluation approach with constant returns to scale
,
Journal of Nonlinear and Convex Analysis
,
23
(
4
),
727
740
.
Mingyue
S.
,
Shujuan
Z.
&
Wei J
S.
(
2023
)
Can financial technology development reduce household energy consumption? Evidence from China
,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
,
30
(
51
),
111481
111497
.
Peter
W.
,
Moreira
J. J. A.
,
Antônio
L. F.
,
Flavia
M.
,
Isadora
T.
&
Yong
T.
(
2024
)
Efficiency analysis of the OECD countries’ long-term productivity using DEA and TOPSIS approaches
,
Benchmarking: An International Journal
,
31
(
4
),
1295
1319
.
Rdder
W.
,
Dellnitz
A.
&
Litzinger
S.
(
2022
)
Combining efficiency and scaling effects in activity analysis: Towards an improved best practice criterion
,
RAIRO – Operations Research
,
56
(
2
),
795
812
.
Rong
L. B.
,
Gong
K. Y.
,
Duan
F. Y.
,
Li
S. K.
,
Zhao
M.
,
He
J. Q.
, Zhou, W. B. & Qiang, Y. U. (
2021
)
Yield gap and resource utilization efficiency of three major food crops in the world – a review
,
Journal of Integrative Agriculture
,
20
(
2
),
349
362
.
Shahsavan
T.
,
Sanei
M.
,
Tohidi
G.
,
Lotfi
F. H.
&
Ghobadi
S.
(
2022
)
A new method of determining decision-making unit congestion under inter-temporal dependence
,
Soft Computing: A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies and Applications
,
26
(
5
),
2063
2073
.
Wang
X. B.
&
Wang
Z. L.
(
2021
)
Research on the impact of environmental regulation on water resources utilization efficiency in China based on the SYS-GMM model
,
Water Science & Technology: Water Supply
,
21
(
7/8
),
3643
3656
.
Yang
Y. M.
,
Deng
Z. H.
,
Lu
X. M.
&
Gao
X. L.
(
2022
)
Study on the environmental efficiency of agricultural water resources about typical cropping patterns around the Dongting Lake area
,
Journal of Water and Climate Change
,
13
(
9/10
),
3716
3728
.
Zhang
C.
,
Hua
R.
,
Shi
Z.
,
Chiu
Y. H.
,
Qin S
J.
&
Sun
X. R.
(
2021
)
Study on water resources consumption and environmental pollution of China's provinces under different economic development levels
,
Natural Resources Forum
,
45
(
3
),
305
325
.
Zhang
M.
,
Qin
J. Y.
,
Tan
H.
,
Mao H
L.
,
Tu
X. J.
&
Jian
J. F.
(
2023
)
Education level of farmers, market-oriented reforms, and the utilization efficiency of agricultural water resources in China
,
Economic Change and Restructuring
,
56
(
6
),
3927
3947
.
Zhe
C.
&
Tonghui
D.
(
2023
)
Investigating and improving the ecological efficiency of urban agglomeration based on super-SBM model
,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research International
,
30
(
54
),
115628
115645
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).