中文摘要：

寻求经济增长与环境改善的双赢已成为中国推进绿色发展的内在要求。人力资本与产业结构调整相互作用，均被视作改善绿色发展效率的重要支撑条件，然而两者的相互作用能否促进中国绿色发展效率提升尚未得到关注。本文梳理人力资本、产业结构调整与绿色发展效率之间的作用机制。在使用包含非期望产出的SBM模型测算中国1997—2013年各省份绿色发展效率的基础上。识别人力资本、产业结构调整及其交互对于绿色发展效率的作用方向与影响力度。结果显示：总体而言，样本期内绿色发展效率存在无效率状态，这与中国粗放型发展方式有关；从空间尺度上看，绿色发展效率呈现出东部高于中西部的态势；从时间尺度上看．绿色发展效率在样本前半期与后半期的变动趋势并不一致，前半期效率值呈现出下降趋势而后半期则表现为波动变动；全国层面与东、中、西部人力资本水平以及人力资本结构未能发挥提升绿色发展效率的作用，产业结构调整的两个维度——产业结构高级化与产业结构合理化在全国层面与东、中部均表现出改善绿色发展效率的态势；人力资本水平（人力资本结构）与产业结构高级化、产业结构合理化的交互项对于绿色发展效率的提升作用在全国层面与东部有所体现但力度不强。应以联动性而非割裂的视角看待中国所进行的人力资本培育与产业结构调整，应当努力减少人力资本与产业结构调整之间相互脱节、不相适应的状况，不断增进人力资本与产业结构调整的适配性以提升中国各省份绿色发展效率。

英文摘要：

The pursuit of the win-win goal of economic growth and environmental improvement is the inherent requirement of promoting green development in China. Human capital interacts with industrial structure adjustment each other, and both of them have been regarded as important supporting conditions to promote green development efficiency; however, the interaction effect of human capital and industrial structure adjustment on improving green development effieieney in China has not been discussed. This paper introduced the mechanism of human capital, industrial structure adjustment and green development efficiency, and investigated the role played by human capital and industrial structure adjustment as well as their interaction on green development efficiency on the basis of measuring provincial green development efficiency in China over the period of 1997 -2013 by using SBM models which contains the undesirable output. The results showed that green development efficiency was in inefficient state related with Chinese extensive development mode and there was a tendency that green development efficiency in the eastern China was higher than that in the Midwestern China over the sample period in terms of spatial scales. There were differences in the trend of green development efficiency for the first half and second half of the sample in terms of time scales ; specifically, a decrease appeared in green development efficiency over the first half of the sample period, while a trend of fluctuations appeared in green development efficiency over the second half of the sample period. The level of human capital and human capital structure failed to improve green development efficiency both at the national and regional levels. Two dimensions of industrial structure adjustment-rationalization and optimization of the industrial structure have improved green development efficiency at the national level and in the eastern and central regions. The weak promotion effect between the level of human capital （human capital structure）, and