The Underlying Reasons behind the Development of Public Electric Buses in China: The Beijing Case
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is interesting because there are not many studies that that investigate the relationship between the different stackholders around the Public Bus Electric Bus Market and the role of subsidies in these interactions. From the point of view of the public administrator, it is necessary to understand the role and importance of each of the participants in the operation of public electric buses and the importance of the subsidy in that operation. These problems are really common and in my opinion are understudied. The methodology applied is correctly aligned with the state of the art although it does not present any novelty.
Minor changes are required in order to improve the paper:
-The review of the state of the art needs a couple of references to extend the analysis and link the findings and conclusions with the objectives of the document.
-References are not in the journal format
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I am very grateful for your comments about the manuscript. According to your advice, we amended the relevant part of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.
1. We have added many references to support our research results and make the dissertation easier to read.
2. Reference format revised according to the journal request.
Best regards.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The reviewed article fits in with the current and relevant topic of the need for more sustainable solutions being utilised on a larger scale in the urban transport systems. The drive for low-carbon and more energy-efficient solutions is becoming even more important issues in the international and national agendas both of developing and developed countries. The implementation of innovative and environment-friendly solutions in various aspects of the economy is not an easy feat, often fraught with opposition from various interest groups afraid that it will undermine their growth opportunities and lifestyles. Because of that, works from this area try for implementing a multidisciplinary approach combining insights about technological, economic, or social factors implementing successful implementation and prolonged operation of such solutions.
The authors of the reviewed paper attempted to describe, using the dynamic game-model analysis, the interactions between stakeholders influencing the development of the public electric buses in China on the example of the Beijing city. The electric vehicles industry in China (with the supporting policies) and the electric bus system currently in use in Beijing were described in order to prepare the model, which later on was used to discuss the possibility of sustaining the development of the system without the subsidies from the public sources. The authors arrived at the conclusion that it will be possible as the EV markets are close to their maturity state.
As the case study proving the assumptions made by authors the paper is sound. But from the scientific point of view, the lack of embedding of the discussed topic in the subject’s literature is the biggest weakness of the assessed article. The literature review is limited only to the introduction and consists of only one page describing the relevant other works concerning both the EVs and used methodological approach. It could be argued that it results from the conscious decision of the authors as the specific circumstances influencing the development of the public electric buses in China, e.g. importance of the government (both local and national) involvement in the sector (both by the subsidies and developing appropriate policies supporting the EV sector), small group of actors on the user side (state-operated organizations) or the manufacturer side (two main companies), but the similar circumstances can be found in most of the European Union countries, Norway, Japan or Canada that also try to shift their public transport systems toward more sustainable solutions. And the authors included only one rather old (2007) source concerning the adoption of the EVs in the UK. Even if the authors would like to limit their literature review only to other Chinese cities, there are works concerning other cities (like Shenzhen) experiences with the implementation of the electric bus into urban transport systems.
The case study description is well prepared but some information do not seem to be relevant for the purpose of the model preparation (i.e. is it really important to include the technical parameters of the used vehicles – as there is no further discussion about what they will influence, e.g. the predicted time span of them staying in use or the foreseen time when they should be replaced to keep up with the progressing technological changes, factors that may be influencing the decision-making process of the actors in the future). Significant simplification for the needs of the analysis of the stakeholders taken into consideration, e.g. electric buses manufacturers (paragraph 3.2, partially justified by the greater share of the Beiqi Foton Motor Cooperation in the EVs market) or not including the other identified parties (paragraph 3.5, once again justified by their indirect influence) will limit the possible implementation of the proposed model for other cities (municipalities). Nonetheless, taking those limitations into consideration, it may be used as a basis for elaborations using different sets of actors/stakeholders working under a different set of circumstances.
The reviewer finds the 5th section (the discussion) significantly lacking as it includes only the more detailed deliberations about the proposed model without referencing to the works of other authors and their results. The literature concerning the implementation of different types of EVs in public transport system using various theoretical and methodical approaches is vast and it includes topics and works dealing with topics and issues that authors highlighted as important for the further development and maturing of the EV industry.
The language used is correct and allows the reader to freely follow the authors’ argument with only some minor spelling errors (e.g. 77-78, 188, 327) which most probably will be removed in the process of text editing and proofreading.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I am very grateful for your comments about the manuscript. According to your advice, we amended the relevant part of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.
1. We have added some literature in the introduction based on your suggestions and make the background more relevant to the topic.
2. We also added literature in the discussions include Shenzhen electric bus model.
3. We added literature by the Chinese Ministry to support the fact that electric vehicles are more energy-efficient than diesel vehicles, all by Chinese car manufacturers also.
4. Some grammar errors and typing errors are revised.
Best regards.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I am very grateful for your comments about the manuscript. According to your advice, we amended the relevant part of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.
1. We have added many references include the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies paper by your recommended, to support our research results and make the dissertation easier to read.
2. Data sources are specified and explicitly declared.
3. Useless details deleted in the paragraphs by your suggestions.
4. Some grammar errors and typing errors are revised.
Best regards.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Page 4, Line 129: Figure 1. and demonstration of EVs for different transportation systems (2013-2015). There is something missing at the beginning of the title of Figure 1.
Page 4: The sum of the percentages in Figure 1 must be 100% and not 99.99%.
Page 5, Line 130: “Source: “A brief report on EVs’ promotion and application”, issued by Key Project 130 Administration Office of EV Industry, China, 2016.” must appear on page 4.
Page 6: Figure 3. distribution of charging stations around Beijing. Please change “distribution” to “Distribution”.
Please check the paper throughout for English grammar and syntax errors (e.g., page 6, line 174, As shown in the figure 3, must be “As shown in figure 3”).
Page 7, Line 198: Figure 4. and network in the field of public electric buses in Beijing. There is something missing at the beginning of the title of Figure 4.
Page 9: Figure 5. dynamic game model of public electric buses in Beijing. Please change “dynamic” to “Dynamic”.
Page 1, Abstract: “……several key players”.
Page 6, line 189: “proceed with further analysis of actors.”
Page 11, line 385: “then the stakeholders (government, user,………..)”.
Please use one term instead of three (stakeholders instead of actors and players).
Page 9, line 280: We now proceed with the analysis of t Game Theory Model,…..Please change “t” to “the”. Please also write a paragraph or two about the concept of the Game Theory Model.
Pages 10 and 11: Please explain why do you use an asterisk for the values of S1, S2, S3, S4.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
I am very grateful for your comments about the manuscript. According to your advice, we amended the relevant part of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.
1. The sum of the percentages in Figure 1 has been corrected.
2. ALL data sources are specified and explicitly declared.
3. The concept of the Game Theory Model has been added in the paragraph.
4. Some grammar errors and typing errors are revised.
5. This paper use stakeholder instead of actors and players thanks to your suggestions.
6. The reason to use an asterisk for the values of S1, S2, S3, S4 is for more clearly shows the optimal solution of strategies in the final Nash equilibrium outcome.
Best regards.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Changes made by the authors improve the reception of the reviewed text.Reviewer 3 Report
The comments have been properly addressed.
