Rural Economic Development Based on Shift-Share Analysis in a Developing Country: A Case Study in Heilongjiang Province, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is interesting, but for me it is like a situation analysis or a case study. The introduction section should describe the scientific problem and the aim of the research. From scientific point of view, It looks like it is not enough “to analyze the change in rural development”.
The authors state that “Shift-share analysis is often used to measure regional economic differences and analyze the contribution of industrial structure” and that “This method has rarely been used in the research on rural economic development.” If this method is rarely used in research on rural economic development, maybe it is not suitable for this type of research? The authors should provide more arguments as to why this method was chosen.
It was not clear for me why, for example, the share component has two different markings, i.e. Nij and SC? Why not SCij? I am not well aware of shift-share analysis, so for me it was difficult to understand and interpret the results. It would help a lot to repeat the interpretation of SC, CC and ISC values bellow the tables 1 and 2 (for example, If SC is positive, it indicates the industry j in county i appears to have a growth advantage).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The literature review provides a good basis for capturing the theoretical background of the topic. The article is based on good statistical analysis and the results are interesting and forward-looking.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
General
The reviewed article is interesting, it points to interesting elements related to the development of rural areas.
I would like to point out a few elements that should help the authors improve the study.
The article requires an organized structure / abstract, keywords, introduction, literature review, material and research method, results, discussion, conclusions, literature / which should ensure its greater clarity
Please indicate the originality of the research presented. How can the results of the analysis be used? Do the results of the analysis provide progress in the current knowledge and to what extent? Can the results of the analysis be used in other countries and to what extent?
Check literature formatting.
Abstract
It needs to be put in order. Its structure should include 1) the research problem (the topic of the thesis mentioned in general), 2) the aim of the work, 3) the method and research area, 4) general description of the research results (general conclusions without describing them, what is their contribution to business practice)
No indication of the method and purpose of the study.
Admission
Generally, the authors lead the reader into the analyzed research problem (its supplementation can be found in the literature review).
The introduction should include the purpose of the study (the reviewer does not notice it), the duration of the study, and an indication of the choice of research method.
Lack of research questions or research hypothesis makes it difficult to evaluate the article.
literature review
Quite an interesting part of the study, it could be extended to a greater extent with European literature.
Method and material
Requires more orde /the article needs more order and clarity/
It is not known why the authors chose such and not other research methods.
Directly under the formulas (1) - (7), the subsequent letters used in the formulas should be described more clearly.
It would also be good to briefly describe the partial variables used in the study, indicating their validity (selection) in the aspect of the topic of the work.
The description contained in lines 210-215 seems to be included in point 3.3. (Data sources)
In line 224 the authors point to the shift-shore method, the question arises whether it is described in method and material
Analysis results (results)
Some need tidying up
Before line 225, it seems necessary to introduce a few sentences to this part of the study / a short text related to the subject of the research being carried out / or one could describe the economic aspect of selected research units
It seems that lines 238-246 / could be moved above table 1
Table 2 seems to be moved closer to the text in which it is referenced
Conclusion / discussion
This section should be broken down into discussion (now section 5.2) and separately for a summary (conclusions / now section 5.1)
The presentation of the discussion seems to be a consequence of the introduction and review of the literature. A reference to the results of research by other authors should be included here.
It seems that lines 405-417 should be transferred to the results part, then smao concerns the description of Figure 6 (lines 423 et seq.).
The suggestions for selected research areas are also incomprehensible for the reviewer
In the part concerning conclusions, please indicate the originality of the presented research. How can the results of the analysis be used? Do the results of the analysis provide progress in the current knowledge and to what extent? Can the results of the analysis be used in other countries and to what extent?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
My comment was "The introduction section should describe the scientific problem..." By that I have in mind, that it is necessary to highlight, that some gap of knowledge exists and to describe how this paper have filled this gap and how you have done it? What is your contribution to scientific literature on rural economic development? How your paper differs from other papers in this field of research? These aspects should be described in the Introduction.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
