An emission trading system (ETS) is a powerful emission reduction tool for achieving low-carbon economic development in the world. Focusing on the industrial subsectors, this paper comprehensively analyzes the environmental and economic effects of the pilot ETS in China from the perspectives of economic development, technological optimization, and innovation-driven development by using the propensity score matching–difference in differences (PSM-DID) model based on 2005–2017 provincial panel data. This paper compensates for the limitations of existing studies on the effects of ETS on different subsectors; furthermore, the triple difference model (DDD) model is used to discuss the impacts of differences in environmental responsibility and economic potential among subsectors on policy effects. The empirical results show that: (1) The pilot ETS produces a 14.5% carbon reduction effect on the covered subsectors while reducing GDP by 4.8% without achieving a low-carbon economy. Thus, production decline is the main reason for carbon emission reductions. (2) Economic development factors have significant positive impacts on carbon emissions, while technological optimization and innovation-driven development are key factors for achieving reductions in carbon emissions. (3) The pilot ETS produces a 60.1% carbon emission inhibition effect and 23.2% GDP inhibition effect on the subsectors with greater environmental responsibility. Therefore, the Chinese government should fully simulate the impact of technological innovation and utilize resource endowment differences in the environmental and economic aspects of different sectors to achieve low-carbon economic development.

A carbon emission trading system (ETS) is an effective market mechanism for promoting the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions and achieving sustainable development between the economy and the environment. To analyze the emissions reduction effect and economic effect of China’s ETS and further discuss the mechanisms of economic development differences and industrial development differences on the final effect of the policy, this study adopts the propensity score matching-difference in differences method and triple difference method. The empirical results show the following: (1) The ETS can simultaneously achieve both the emissions reduction effect and economic effect when key control variables are included. (2) The population, carbon emissions intensity and per capita GDP have significant positive impacts on carbon emissions; the environmental pollution control intensity, research structure, and research intensity have negative impacts on carbon emissions; and the capita stock, employment, and energy consumption have significant positive economic effects. (3) The ETS has a stronger inhibitory effect on the provinces with higher levels of economic and service development compared to the provinces with lower levels of economic and service development. In contrast, the policy has a weaker inhibitory effect on provinces with higher levels of industrial and construction development compared with the lower level provinces.

Under the ‘dual carbon’ goal, the key to environmental-friendly economic development is to increase total factor productivity (TFP) in a greener way. However, as a key market-based emission reduction mechanism, the exploration related to whether the emission trading system (ETS) promotes green TFP (GTFP) is not deep enough, especially for secondary decomposition of this technical index and for specific industrial subsectors. In this study, combining biennial Malmquist-Luenberger productivity index with multi-period difference in differences model, we assess the technological progress of China’s pilot ETS dynamically. The results show that the pilot ETS promoted GTFP significantly in the industrial subsectors, by 8.5%. The technology change index increased by 17.5%, which is the key action path to increasing GTFP. Furtherly, the mechanism test confirms that the policy works mainly through innovation channel. This study implied that the governance toward carbon-zero economies could be accelerated much more effectively by technological innovation of green.