Retracted: Effect of driving domain on driving attitude profiles in winter seasons of India

Abstract

The trademark of motor vehicle use and driving attitude profiles explores new safety upgrades and energy redemption because of the role of driving attitude profiles and driving domains on road mishaps and traffic intensities. Thus, the goal of this research was to identify driving attitude profiles for multiple driving domains (on the basis of speed limits and winter conditions) from real‐world driving information and to investigate how these driving environments have an impact on driving attitude profiles. The study for this research was located in Bhubaneswar, India, where driving information from 64 motorists was collected with Fog Monitor (FM‐120) for at least 12 months. The outcomes indicate that both speed limits and winter states influence driving attitude profiles significantly. Specifically, for winter states, the outcomes provide authentication that motorists drive more quietly (normal speed is 21% lower for zero visibility (visibility < 100 m) than under haze conditions (visibility: 2–5 km), while positive and negative accelerations decrease by 7% and 9%, respectively), when deliberating the effect of speed limit more local streets (limits II, III, and IV streets) are the ones that present more reckless driving profiles in terms of acceleration (30%–40% increase from limit I to limit IV streets). The contribution of this study regards the quantification of the impacts of driving domains on driving attitude profiles, providing evidence that winter conditions significantly affect driving attitude profiles, leading motorists to adjust their driving attitude profiles to the driving domains. However, regarding the speed limit, the differences found in driving attitude profiles seem to be more a consequence of the infrastructure characteristics than an adjustment of driving attitude profiles.

Can regional environmental quality improve green innovation performance? an empirical analysis from China

“…Under different thresholds, its elasticity coefficient shows that with the increase of per capita GDP, its effect on urban GIE varies in size and direction. When per capita GDP is low, total environmental quality (E) has a more obvious inhibitory effect on urban innovation, and with the continuous increase of per capita GDP, The total environmental quality (E) has a relatively obvious promoting effect on the urban innovation, but this promoting effect shows a further weakening trend with the increase of GDP per capita (Chang et al, 2021;Adhikari et al, 2022;Lan et al, 2022;Tang et al, 2022;Zhang et al, 2022a). Compare the impact of three wastes pollution treatment (EP), green environment (EG) and total environmental quality (E) on urban GIE under different threshold values of GDP per capita.…”

What Affects Rural Ecological Environment Governance Efficiency? Evidence from China

“…Huang et al (2015), based on the interprovincial panel data in 2011, used efficiency super-efficiency DEA to evaluate the efficiency of the input-output index system of rural ecological environment governance, constructed a comprehensive evaluation matrix combined with the level of rural economic development, and carried out cluster analysis on 31 provinces and regions [21]. Sun Yu et al (2019) used the BCC model in the DEA method to construct the input-output index system of rural ecological environment governance; taking the cross-sectional data of 31 provinces in 2016 as the research object, they evaluated the efficiency of rural ecological environment governance in China [22].…”

“…Referring to the practices of Huang and Sun [21,22], this paper launches the investment of rural ecological environment governance from three aspects: rural production environment governance investment, rural natural environment governance investment, and rural residential environment governance investment, and launches the output of rural ecological environment governance from three aspects: economic benefit, social benefit, and ecological benefit. The evaluation index system of rural ecological environment governance efficiency is constructed, as shown in Table 1.…”

Can Green Innovation Improve Regional Environmental Carrying Capacity? An Empirical Analysis from China

“…In the process of constructing the indicator system, seven representative indicators are selected from two dimensions, namely, endowment of natural conditions and influence of human activities, by drawing on the research results of scholars from various disciplines, to systematically construct an indicator system for measuring the absorption capacity of the environment to air pollutants [ 75 ]. It should be noted that in order to ensure the single nature of the indicators, the urban green area is deducted from the urban construction land area in the selection of urban construction land area data, so that the urban construction land area more effectively reflects the size of the physical space carrier for human production and life [ 76 ]. The article selects the entropy weight method to objectively assign values to each index, and assesses the amount of information obtained by determining the entropy value see Table 1 below.…”

“…The mediating variable is PM2.5. Analyzed from the perspective of environmental carrying capacity, air pollutants can be divided into primary and secondary pollutants according to the formation process [ 76 , 77 , 78 ]. The so-called primary pollutants refer to pollutants emitted directly from the sources, such as carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide.…”