The Spatiotemporal Non-Stationary Effect of Industrial Agglomeration on Urban Land Use Efficiency: A Case Study of Yangtze River Delta, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This topic is valuable from an academic point of view. However, the following aspects need to be improved for publication:
- Introduction: It focuses too much on China and lacks comparative analysis of other countries' research on urban land use efficiency, which greatly reduces the general significance of the study; Moreover, the structure of this part needs to be adjusted, especially analytical methods on urban land use efficiency destroys the tightening of the structure. The supporting literatures of some important viewpoints (e.g., reference 12 and 13) are of a long time, which reduces the importance of research issues
- In the data and Methods section, please explain the specific scope of "city" in urban land use efficiency, whether it is the whole city or the built-up urban area, or other areas; The industry is divided into six categories, among which the tertiary industry is divided into four categories. For the secondary industry with large internal differences, the classification is rather rough, which may affect the reliability of the research results. How to consider it? And what is the specific scope of the "city" of these socioeconomic data? Besides, it is recommended to note the source of the base drawing in Figure 2.
- The conclusion also needs to be reorganized, which is different from the introduction, and specifically points out the uniqueness and academic contribution of this research; The exact relation between agglomeration externality and urban land use efficiency should be clearly stated in this part, even if "complex" or "differece" exists, its exact meaning should be clearly stated.
Author Response
We appreciate all constructive comments and suggestions from reviewers. Your helps and supports are the important motivation for us to improve the manuscript. We made the revisions based on each comment and suggestion, we also submit a revision note to explain how we revised. Where, responses are highlighted in red, and newly added contents in the manuscript are highlighted in blue
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
as many other papers this one too is too much based on unverifiable data.
Author Response
We appreciate all constructive comments and suggestions from reviewers. Your helps and supports are the important motivation for us to improve the manuscript. We made the revisions based on each comment and suggestion, we also submit a revision note to explain how we revised. Where, responses are highlighted in red, and newly added contents in the manuscript are highlighted in blue
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Title:
1/ condensate the main revelation into a short and groundbreaking claim, do not indicate local impact
Abstract:
2/ better follow the established schema of writing academic Abstract: A/ introduction (urgency and significance of the research hypothesis); B/ principles of the methods used + key results; C/ conclusions (commercial and environmental impacts)
3/ reduce the use of abbreviations and technical terms, please understand that the purpose of the Abstract is to explain to all readers (including those from other disciplines) what the paper is about
4/ better highlight the urgency and significance of your work from global point of view, clearly indicate who (and how) will benefit from these findings
Introduction:
5/ kindly note that is an international journal, do not refer to any local names and phenomena
6/ make sure you refer only to sources reviewable by all our international audience of readers (available in English)
7/ better explain the urgency and importance of its investigation from global point of view, clearly identify how will our readers benefit from the investigation of the research hypothesis
Methods and data:
8/ the method must be presented in such a way that it can be reproduced anytime, by anyone, anywhere (do not create obstacles like referring to specific location etc.)
9/ do not use any local names (towns, regions, villages, rivers etc.) thorough the manuscript
10/ each Tab. and Fig. should be provided with caption that describes A/ what can be seen and B/ how is this relevant to the research hypothesis
Results:
11/ each Tab. and Fig. should be provided with caption that describes A/ what can be seen and B/ how is this relevant to the research hypothesis
12/ avoid data overkill, present only the most most industrially important results
Discussion:
13/ show more self-criticism to your work (can all the methods and results be fully trusted? what are the weaknesses of the methods used? where do the main measurement inaccuracies arise? what are the limitations from a commercial point of view? are the lessons learned transferable to other fields?)
14/ propose some improvements and direction for future research
Conclusion:
15/ do not repeat your methods and results again and again, please understand that the Conclusion chapter is not a summary of your work, present only original and industrially significant revelations that have the potential to expand the horizon of human knowledge (higher level of generalization is mandatory)
Author Response
We appreciate all constructive comments and suggestions from reviewers. Your helps and supports are the important motivation for us to improve the manuscript. We made the revisions based on each comment and suggestion, we also submit a revision note to explain how we revised. Where, responses are highlighted in red, and newly added contents in the manuscript are highlighted in blue
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
It looks better now. However, it is also suggested to make additional explanations to strengthen the main conclusions and highlight its contributions.
Author Response
Thank you for your great patience with our manuscript and friendly reminder. We appreciate your comment very much. We have carefully revised the paper according to your suggestion.
Point 1: It looks better now. However, it is also suggested to make additional explanations to strengthen the main conclusions and highlight its contributions.
Response: Acknowledged. We took reviewer’s suggestion and added another more paragraph in the paper. Newly added contents in the manuscript are highlighted in blue.
#Line 841-847
The contribution of this study is to explore the impact and mechanism of industrial agglomeration on urban land use efficiency, especially at the temporal and spatial level, which further strengthens the complex relationship between urban land use efficiency and industrial development. On the one hand, it is one of the important development directions of the existing urban land use efficiency research. On the other hand, it can provide useful theoretical and practical guidance for urban industrial development planning.
Thank you again for your excellent work. Your work has shown us the way and pushes us to move on. We’ve learned a lot during this period indeed. Best regards.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
