The Global Value Chain and Welfare Effects of Tariffs—Counterfactual Analysis of Sino–US Economic and Trade Frictions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, 

The article has contents and methodological approaches that may be in line with the scope and mission of the journal Sustainability. However, in the current state, it seems challenging to identify the originality and contribution of the study. 

A significant revision should be adopted to make the article's content and structure in line with the standards of the journal. Below I provide some indications that may be useful in this process of revision and that may help understand the aims of the article:

• Abstract -please write the abstract according to the following indications of the journal, keeping it a maximum of 200 words: the abstract should be a single paragraph and should follow the style of structured abstracts but without headings: 1) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; 2) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied  3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings (in the current version this is the main part of the abstract), and 4) Conclusion: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. The abstract should be an objective representation of the article: it must not contain results which are not presented and substantiated in the main text and should not exaggerate the main conclusions.
• Introduction - even if there are no limits in terms of length, the introduction seems too long and should be more concise, leaving theoretical and methodological aspects to be developed in the body of the article. Moreover, the structure of the article should be included at the end.
• The theoretical section - does not seem to be addressing a theoretical section, but a methodological discussion, which instead should be developed in the second part of the article. Instead, the theoretical section seems to be included later on (paragraph 2.3). Paragraphs need to be better connected. 
• Methods - the methodology is representing a great part of the article and while it provides information to follow the steps of the methodology, it should be more concise and leave details in the appendix. 
• Figures - Figures in p.34 should be in English.
• References - the article struggles to contribute to the current discussion of the journal. I invite the authors to consider contribution of Sustainability which are dealing with global supply chains and US-China trade frictions. 
• General structure: more concise language and need to explain the key theoretical and methodological contribution of the study. 
• Language - acronyms should be presented in an extended version the first time they are presented and should be used consistently in the article (e.g. Unites States, US).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I suggest minor English language editing and avoiding long complex sentences that go apart from main idea.

Just after introducing variables authors pass to the hypothesis, however, it would be better to add a short information about data, its range, descriptives and others.

In the Literature review section, you must remove statements about history of the general equilibrium analysis model for multi-country and multi-sector heterogeneous enterprises into the form of CES production function and introduces an input-output structure. 

Results should be followed with a discussions part to bring all hypothesis together and conclude. You should avoid using variable acronyms in this part, in this case reader needs to go back previously part to see what that block letter acronym stand for.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The Authors have carefully addressed the indications provided in the first round of review.  In the final editing check spelling of Untied States to United States. No need to put acronym US for extended the second time used in the abstract. 

Author Response

Point 1: The Authors have carefully addressed the indications provided in the first round of review.  In the final editing check spelling of Untied States to United States. No need to put acronym US for extended the second time used in the abstract. 

Response 1：Thank you for your careful review. As you mentioned the problem of spelling and acronym US, we have addressed these issues. Here is the revision of the abstract:
Abstract： This paper aims to study the impact of Sino-US(China-United States) trade frictions on global value chains and welfare changes. We introduce the general equilibrium model for multi-country and multi-sector heterogeneous enterprises and combine it with an input-output structure. The results show that the additional tariffs on China and the US reduce bilateral trade and affect the overall imports and exports of both countries to varying degrees. The results show that the additional tariffs on China and the US affect both countries’ overall imports and exports to varying degrees. The impact of the trade of manufactured goods is greater than that of the trade of intermediate goods; The welfare effect in China has dropped by 0.163%, while the corresponding effect in the US has improved by 0.016%. The main reason for the decline in China’s welfare is the deterioration of the terms of trade. Increased tariffs between China and the US would reduce bilateral trade between the two countries, particularly in intermediate goods, and would cause a reorganization of global value chains in both regions.