Next Article in Journal
Does Knowledge Evolution Matter? Reflection on Alpine Tribes Industry, Development, and Transformation
Next Article in Special Issue
Satisfaction of Logistics Dispatchers Who Use Electric Tricycles\linebreak for the Last Mile of Delivery: Perspective from Policy Intervention
Previous Article in Journal
When Scent Becomes a Weapon—Plant Essential Oils as Potent Bioinsecticides
Previous Article in Special Issue
Dynamic Mechanisms and Institutional Frameworks of China’s Green Development: An Analysis from the Perspective of Collaboration
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

The Influence of the Policy of Replacing Environmental Protection Fees with Taxes on Enterprise Green Innovation—Evidence from China’s Heavily Polluting Industries

Sustainability 2022, 14(11), 6850; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116850
by Suyu Huang 1, Hanlian Lin 1, Yongjunbei Zhou 1, Haonan Ji 2 and Naiping Zhu 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2022, 14(11), 6850; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116850
Submission received: 30 April 2022 / Revised: 26 May 2022 / Accepted: 30 May 2022 / Published: 3 June 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

  1. The abstract needs to revise. The motive, purposes, and methodology need to write down in the abstract.
  2. The verification of H2 is not clear enough, please address more about the reasoning.
  3. Use median as the SME standard may not be a good idea. There should be your own definition of SME in China.
  4. How do the authors differentiate “corporate execute with academic research experience” and “corporate execute without academic research experience”?

 

Author Response

Thank you for your very helpful suggestions for the revision of my article, my reply to you is in the attachment, thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

In general I think that your manuscript is very good. I have a few remarks, separated in two groups, English and typo corrections and clarification of subject.

English and typo correction:

  1. page 1, paragraph 2: According to the report of...
  2. page 12, below Table 5, row before last, missing blank „...policyin....“

Clarifications:

  1. please add acronym definition or explanations when the acronym is first used for the terms: CSMAR, Wind, DID, PSM
  2. if possible give reference to English versions of Environmental protection law and Regulation on pollutant discharge fee. The law from 1989 can be found on web in pdf form. Is there a pdf version in English of the new law?
  3. in section 2.4.2 you state that 18412 samples were placed in control group and 6929 samples in experimental group. On what bases where the samples placed in each group?
  4. Table 4, missing explanation for *,**, and ***.
  5. It would be beneficiary to cross reference hypothesis (H1-H5) in Conclusion section.

Author Response

Thank you for your very helpful suggestions for the revision of my article, my reply to you is in the attachment, thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

‘In the end, it examines the relationship between senior executives’ academic research experience and enterprises’ green innovation, and finds that senior executives’ academic research experience can not only promote green innovation, but also improve the R&D efficiency of green innovation.’ – rephrase to avoid repetitions. All quoted passages must include page(s). ‘ “China will raise the standards for pollutant discharge, strengthen the responsibility – does not have quote ending. ‘many scholars have found through research that more and better environmental policies’ – it is obvious that ‘through research’, but you need supporting evidence as regards ‘many scholars’. ‘in China by using Chinese provincial panel’ – remove Chinese. Authors’ first name must be removed when citing a source, e.g., Wang Banban and Qi Shaozhou (2016). Hypotheses must be constructed based on more supporting sources, preferably as recent as possible. ‘A lot of literature studies come to the conclusion’ – specify them. ‘The research (Zhou Kaitang, MA Zhiming, Wu Liansheng; 2017) shows’ – should be ‘Kaitang et al. (2017) show’. The same for ‘In the research (Sheng Mingquan, Zhang Yue, Wang Shun; 2021), it is found’. ‘Zhang Jie (2015) and other scholars found in their studies’ – why not specifying them? ‘Scholars often believe that the higher the value is, the greater the wealth and innovation’ – sources? A Discussion section is needed. The methodological descriptions of the manuscript require more refinement: important theoretical and methodological specifications must be made in order for the paper to be clearer and its argument more convincing.

The relationship between corporate environmental performance and sustainable economic development as regards enterprise green innovation has not been covered, and thus such recent sources should be cited:

Ionescu, L. (2021). “Corporate Environmental Performance, Climate Change Mitigation, and Green Innovation Behavior in Sustainable Finance,” Economics, Management, and Financial Markets 16(3): 94–106. doi: 10.22381/emfm16320216.

Chapman, D. (2021). “Environmentally Sustainable Urban Development and Internet of Things Connected Sensors in Cognitive Smart Cities,” Geopolitics, History, and International Relations 13(2): 51–64. doi: 10.22381/GHIR13220214.

Obadă, D.R., Dabija, D.C. 2022. “In Flow”! Why Do Social-Media Users Share Fake News About Environmentally Friendly Brands on Social Media? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 4861. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084861

Ionescu, L. (2021). “Leveraging Green Finance for Low-Carbon Energy, Sustainable Economic Development, and Climate Change Mitigation during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Review of Contemporary Philosophy 20: 175–186. doi: 10.22381/RCP20202112.

Author Response

Thank you for your very helpful suggestions for the revision of my article, my reply to you is in the attachment, thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

This revised version can be published.

Back to TopTop