Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript presents the empirical study they did base on the panel data from 30 provinces and cities in China from 2011 to 2021 and also explained how they performed the analysis. Based on all the analyses, the authors provide their conclusion, and suggestions, and also point out the limitations of their analyses. The authors did a good job to present their study, and this manuscript could be considered to be accepted after some minor revisions.

1. please provide the reference number for sections 33.2.1 and 3.2.4;

2. please increase the image resolution for all the figures

 

please pay attention to the sentence patterns and structures.

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study empirically investigated the current situation and resilience level of China's regional digital innovation ecosystem development using a global entropy method, the technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution, based on panel data from 30 Chinese provinces and cities. The results indicated that the resilience level of China's regional digital innovation ecosystem has been growing from 2011 to 2021.

The regional innovation development is a very relevant topic in the modern conditions of the information economy. The digital innovation ecosystem is the most important factor in regional innovation development. The originality of the study lies in the choice of the object of study - the regional digital innovation ecosystem and in the use of correlation and regression analysis in the conduct of the study.

The results of the study are of practical novelty. The authors explained the concept of regional digital  innovation ecosystem resilience, built an evaluation index system based on it, and measured the resilience level of regional digital innovation ecosystems using the global entropy method and TOPSIS model, analyzed the results with Moran's I. The authors used the obstacle and panel model to identify and discuss the obstacle and driving factors affecting the resilience level.

According to the reviewer, it is necessary to substantiate the choice of research methods in more detail and assess the degree of reliability of the research results. According to the reviewer, it is necessary to formulate the hypothesis. A conclusion is needed to confirm / refute the hypothesis.

The authors' recommendations for various regions of China are of practical value.

In terms of content, the conclusions correspond to the results of the study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper studies the current situation and resilience level of China's regional digital innovation ecosystem development using a global entropy method. The authors find that the resilience level of China's regional digital innovation ecosystem has been growing from 2011 to 2021. My suggestions are as follows:

1. The contribution of the paper to the literature. The paper does an excellent job in terms of literature review. However, the authors do not highlight the contribution of the paper to the literature. I suggest the authors highlight the contribution, so that readers can get a better understanding of how this paper advances our current knowledge. 

2. Methods. On p. 15, the paper mentioned that "all variables were calculated by taking logarithms." My concern is that some variables may have a value of zero. If so, the logarithms will fall apart. I suggest the authors clarify this issue in the next round of revision. 

3. Model. Eq[20] indicates that both dependent variable and independent variables are of the same year. I suggest the authors lag the independent variables by one year. This will avoid the endogeneity issue.

4. The correlation matrix is missing. The paper does not include the correlation matrix. I suggest the authors add it. 

I hope the authors find the suggestions helpful.

The English are good.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

I read the work with interest. It is well organized, logical and clear. I appreciate the structuring of the conclusions and especially point 6.2 "Suggestions and advice" (I would complete "Suggestions and recommendations for regional policy makers"

 Recommendations:

 3.2. Research Methods - if you keep in this form the description of the research methods - formulas used - then explain the notations within the formulas. For example: ???′, ???, ?? , ?? - the meaning / indicators taken into account.

 3.2.3. Moran's I - Sources to be rechecked. For example. Source [43] - cited on line 254 "The calculation formulas [43] for Moran's I are as follows:" - In the cited work - I did not identify this calculation formula. Xu, J.; Yang, R.; Liu, R.; Ren, W. Vitamin Nutritional Status and Spatial Differentiation Characteristics of Chinese National 656 Physical Fitness. Arch Latinoam Nutr 2019, 69, 81-90.

 4.2 I think it is necessary to describe the data series used more concretely. Even if the work refers to 30 regions of China, I think that a series of data (or a single indicator) used for at least one region can be exemplified.

Also, I think you should have in References - the source of the data or at least of the institutions that made this data available: China Statistical Yearbook, China Science and Technology Statistical Yearbook, China Torch Statistical Yearbook, China High Technology Industry Statistical Yearbook, and the statistical yearbooks of provinces and cities.

 Thank you very much!

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf