Accelerating the Construction of a Unified Domestic Market to Promote Sustainable Economic Development: Mechanisms, Challenges and Countermeasures—A Perspective Based on the General Law of the Market Economy and Chinese Reality

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review report on Accelerating the Construction of a Unified Domestic Market to 2 Promote Sustainable Economic Development: Mechanisms, 3 Challenges and Countermeasures—A Perspective Based on the 4 General Law of the Market Economy and Chinese Reality

       i.          Abstract

a.      Please state the period of study

b.     State one or recommendations that emanated from the study

     ii.          Introduction

a.      Please buttress your arguments with references. There is only one reference in the first paragraph of the introduction.

b.     The contributions of the study should be further improved.

   iii.          Literature review

a.      The authors did not review the extant studies. Justification should be given to this or a section should create for the review.

b.      Contributions should be linked to the gaps in the literature.

   iv.          Discussion of results should be improved.

     v.          Policy implications should emanate from the findings

   vi.           Limitations should be stated and future research idea should be well stated.

 vii.          The grammatical structure of the study should be generally improved.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study highlights the importance of accelerating the development of a unified domestic market for China's sustainable economic development. The internal mechanisms for accelerating the formation of such a market are analyzed in four dimensions, and some empirical analysis is conducted to try and identify existing challenges. Policy suggestions include strengthening theoretical studies, research and publicity, unifying fundamental institutional systems and market rules, and accelerating high-level opening to the outside world and market facilities' high-quality connectivity.

 

Comments

-          The paper's motivation should be explicitly stated in the introduction, highlighting the main innovation and its contribution to the literature.

-          For the journal “Sustainability” environmental problems should be more emphasized in the paper's relevance to sustainability. Such problems can act as a barometer of corruption and affect the development of the domestic market. The study by Yan et al. (2022) should be cited to support this argument (see Yan, Hao, Guo & Wu, 2022, Are environmental problems a barometer of corruption in the eyes of residents? Evidence from China, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/kykl.12293)

-          The concept of a “socialist market economy” should be defined and elaborated upon, especially given the perception of China as a highly capitalist society an many domains (e.g. high competition and weak social welfare nets).

-          The paper should provide a better description of the current restrictions in the domestic market, including trade, migration, and freedom of movement restrictions across regions and provinces in China. A careful illustration of the current restrictions is required.

-          The analysis should be more comparative, and the paper should include comparisons between the European Union and China.

-          The paper lacks a section on the development of sustainable political institutions in China. There is evidence to suggest that political competition, including real democracy, can foster sustainable and equitable development. The study by Tang and Tang (2018) should be cited as it highlights the challenges here (see Tang & Tang, 2018, Democracy's Unique Advantage in Promoting Economic Growth: Quantitative Evidence for a New Institutional Theory, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/kykl.12184). More discussion on that aspect is required.

-          The paper needs to clarify how China's success in the past 40 years, particularly after the 1980 reforms, can be replicated now once more under potentially more authoritarian structures, especially given the perception of China's move from one-party rule to one-person rule is now completed.

-          Table 3 should be made more comparable to Table 1 in terms of measures used.

-          The evidence presented in the paper should be explained more clearly to support the conclusions drawn. Partly, the paper lacks evidence to support its claims.

-          The paper should provide a clearer take-home message and a more explicit policy message.

-          The description of Table 1 should be improved, including a precise explanation of what is measured and how the indicators are derived.

-          Figure 4 should focus on Expressway length per capita rather than the total Expressway length.

-          Figure 5 requires improvement too.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1. The paper is fairly well, done, with good writing and analysis. 

2a. The idea that a more unified market is important to growth and development is a good one. One weakness of the paper in this regard is it should have brought out the problems with this currently in China. The internal barriers to trade is not brought out in earnest till page 5. I think before that, more should have been discussed about this.

2b. There was much discussed on the positive side of marketization and internal trade, which is fine (and the cases in economic history in Europe and the US also). Also minimizing transaction costs and propert rights improvements. All fine to discuss. But I was looking for more research on internal barriers to trade. First from a general standpoint (economics / economic history research)  and then on a more specific aspect (about China). Tighten up the positive-side material (ie less detail on it) and expand on the focus of your paper, which is the problems with internal trade and how to resolve this, and why it matters (when resolved). 

3a. After discuss more research on internal trade barriers, which you have some of on pp5-8 (divide into more general research and then China-specific), then give some real examples of internal trade barriers. This could be a very helpful paper, especially to researchers looking at institutional voids, or the regionalism problem in China.

 

3b. Examples should include the (effective) trade barriers between certain provinces -- I have heard stories of goods having to take a large detour because two adjacent provinces would not allow direct trade of certain goods right across their shared border, so the goods had to go through a 3rd province to get to their destination).I have heard that for a while, Guangzhou would not allow Shanhai built cars to be registered in Guangzhou (or Guangdong?) and vice versa. Now I don't know how many or much of these stories are true, or maybe years ago, but it would be good if the paper addressed these (maybe mention some old ones that are fixed, but some newer ones also that still exist).

 

4. Sandra Poncet (economist) write about internal trade barriers on China (mostly between provinces). Please find her work (2005 or so). She found that there wax an implicit,  average "tarrif" of about 21% on nany good crossing provincial borders  from its place of origin to another province of municipality.   How much of that is still true today . The paper needs much more in terms of real examples and little stories and examples that researchers outside of economics (eg international business)  can refer to.

5. Try to remove slogans from the  paper (socialism with Chinese characteristics). Your paper needs to stay detached and scientific.

 

 

.

 

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have substantially revised the manuscript. I am okay with their response and would recommend the work for acceptance

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable comments concerning our revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

I am relatively happy with most revisions.

However, I think that the authors have to engage more in a comparative analysis. In particular, the EU is an interesting comparison. Such a comparative analysis will make the paper stronger and more relevant. Then suggestions for improvements in China do not come "out of the blue". It is not necessary to develop new indicators here. A verbal comparison is sufficient.

Author Response

Please see the attached reponse letter.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf