Sustainable Development of Industrial Renovation: Renovation Paths of Village-Level Industrial Parks in Pearl River Delta

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Main Comments and Suggestions:

The topic and the idea of the study is interesting and valuable, however there are some weaknesses in the presentation of the study – the manuscript needs revision to increase the scientific soundness of presented research.

1.The title is rather clear itself, however the relations pointed aspects such as Economic, Ecological and Social sustainability effects should be more precise pointed in all stages of the study to keep the direct relation with the presented data in the manuscript. In the present form of manuscript they are somehow hidden, thus the title should be more general (?).

2. Abstract is quite long, it should be more compact and regarding the rules of the journal the abstract should be a total of about 200 words maximum. Key words are related to the topic.

3. Introduction – the scope of aspects presented in this section is well organized and argue the research presented in the manuscript, also create main background for the study. However, the used literature is based mostly on Chinese positions and should be more complex and developed towards more international literature to increase the value of presented background.

The main aim of the study is a bit hidden in a rather long description in lines: 120-130; it should be more clear and legible for readers. The presentation of study stages included in lines 131-137 is unnecessary in this section in my opinion, it is better to describe all stages in the section of Materials and Methods.

Regarding the main methods – the Authors present mostly the main factors of the proposed model and which of them are related to each path, however the description of used method itself is not well presented in my opinion. It must be more clear to be used by other scientists, thus needs improvement.

4. Description contained in all subsections in section 3. "Transformation path based on ownership of village collectives" is generally much developed. But the weakness of the manuscript is that it is rather difficult to find out which part is the presentation of method, and finally what are the target study outcomes. Section 3 includes a mix of them in my opinion - the collected data should be very clearly present in all stages step by step. This part needs much improvement.

5. The information presented in the section 6. Conclusions and Discussion is much developed but sounds more like a wider presentation of main results and a kind of Authors opinion than typical discussion. Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted in perspective of previous studies with references to literature items. Without any links to other studies related to the presented approach and study the value of the manuscript is lower.

It is also not clear what are the main conclusions – they are generally not formulated, in my opinion.

Summing up, the topic is very interesting and the presented transformation/renovation paths are valuable, but the form of presentation of the study needs improvement to make it clear for readers/scientists, and to highlight the innovation of the study.

I can not recommend publication of the manuscript in present form, it needs major revision.

Author Response

RESPONSE to the comments given by REVIEWER #1:

1. The title is rather clear itself, however the relations pointed aspects such as Economic, Ecological and Social sustainability effects should be more precise pointed in all stages of the study to keep the direct relation with the presented data in the manuscript. In the present form of manuscript they are somehow hidden, thus the title should be more general. 

Thanks for the suggestion. We have changed the title into “Sustainable development of industrial renovation: Renovation paths of village-level industrial parks in Pearl River Delta” . (Line 2-3)

2. Abstract is quite long, it should be more compact and regarding the rules of the journal the abstract should be a total of about 200 words maximum. Key words are related to the topic.

As suggested, we have revised the abstract. (Line 11-26)

“Driven by manufacturing supply reform and regional industrial transformation and upgrading, village industrial parks are key areas for deepening urban renewal. The complex relationship between various property rights actors is a key factor limiting the sustainable development of village industrial parks, and thus attracts considerable research. However, existing research is limited to individual cases and lacks systematic approaches to provide effective guidance for the renovation of village industrial parks. In addition, the paper summarises the participation pathways and characteristics of 12 typical cases of village industrial parks in the PDRD. This is particularly true for rural industrial parks. The study identifies five scenarios based on the renewal of village collective ownership (government warehousing, land lease to developers, land lease to operating companies, land lease to enterprises, independent management); five situations based on the renewal of market enterprises' rights of use (regular leasing, government support, abolition on expiry, introduction of enterprises, autonomous management); and four situations based on the renewal of government management rights (land expropriation, unified lease management, policy stimulation, supervision and management). The results are valuable for the research of urban regeneration and sustainable development in the context of government ownership.”

3. However, the used literature is based mostly on Chinese positions and should be more complex and developed towards more international literature to increase the value of presented background.The main aim of the study is a bit hidden in a rather long description in lines: 120-130; it should be more clear and legible for readers.

As suggested, we have added references from other sources and explained the aim of study in a more clear way. (Line 74-113)

“Existing studies have examined the property rights actors of village-level industrial parks in economically developed regions, such as the Pearl River Delta region, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, and the Yangtze River Delta, from the perspectives of the government, markets, and villages [7-9]. Research in the Pearl River Delta region has found that excessive government supervision limits the distribution of benefits among participants, weakens the production intensity of village-level industrial parks, leads to a lack of market attractiveness of projects, and limits the positivity of the market [10-12]. The dominance of the market and the reconfiguration of the land tenure structure will also affect changes in the state land system and limit the state's management of land [13,14]. In addition, government expropriation of collective land will lead to urban sprawl and generate social conflicts, for example by limiting villagers' income from land transfer and increasing the inability of residents who have lost their land to resettle [15-17].Studies in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region show that in the process of stakeholder participation in collective construction land, the unclear definition of construction land property rights leads to the establishment of incomplete collective rights of occupation, use, income and disposal, and the government has thus established implicit occupation rights over collective construction land [18]. Studies in the Yangtze River Delta region point out that the public, as the most fundamental stakeholder in industrial land redevelopment, is excluded from decision-making, which tends to neglect public interests [19-21]. In general, studies in the Pearl River Delta region emphasize private power, those in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region emphasize government power, and those in the Yangtze River Delta region emphasize market power [22-28]. At present, the research and institutional development of property rights actors in village-level industrial parks is still in its initial stage, and the analysis of property rights actors in village-level industrial parks mainly focuses on individual case studies, lacking systematic horizontal comparisons and summaries of different models. At the same time, China's village-level industrial parks involve complex property right actors; the current research shows that the cooperation mode has a certain influence on society, ecology, economy and politics, but there is a lack of in-depth analysis and attempts to develop theoretical frameworks on the operational mechanisms of multiple benefit play. Therefore, under the specific institutional environment of China, it is of great significance to study the sustainable development path of village-level industrial parks in order to construct the relevant theoretical model and analytical framework of cooperation among power subjects based on the influence of resources, rules and organisational concepts involved by different right subjects.”

Using the 'structure-participant' model as an extension framework, the paper explores the environmental, economic and social culture of sustainable village industries and discusses a healthy and sustainable way of developing village industries. It also examines how these different pathways contribute to environmental, economic, social and cultural sustainability”

4. However the description of used method itself is not well presented in my opinion. It must be more clear to be used by other scientists, thus needs improvement.

As suggested, we have described and explained the research steps of the "structure-participant" model more clearly so that it can be used more clearly by scientists and so that the theoretical model can be better connected to the investigations and analyses that follow. (Line 163-175)

“The "structure-participant" institutional model is mostly applied in single case analysis, but in order to summarize the general pattern and analyze multiple cases more systematically, this paper improves the steps of the traditional "structure-participant" model. First, we take different power actors as the base point and systematically deduce their transformation paths in different situations; then, we investigate the process of land redevelopment and interview the participants to objectively describe the effects of the case before and after transformation; third, we analyze the roles and impacts of different participants in the process of land redevelopment. Finally, the case study is combined with social theory to reveal the main factors affecting the process and sustainability of industrial land transformation under the existing land power system and the possible outcomes of the participation of power actors in the process, thus providing a theoretical and empirical basis for objectively evaluating the existing research on industrial land redevelopment models and development paths.” 

5. Description contained in all subsections in section 3. "Transformation path based on ownership of village collectives" is generally much developed. But the weakness of the manuscript is that it is rather difficult to find out which part is the presentation of method, and finally what are the target study outcomes. Section 3 includes a mix of them in my opinion - the collected data should be very clearly present in all stages step by step. This part needs much improvement.

Thanks for the suggestion, this part of the article is based on the steps provided by the theoretical model, in which the structural elements and participants are derived from the theoretical model. The case study section presents the data from the pre-transformation survey and the post-transformation survey in turn, and we have tried our best to present the available data to support our research results because some data are confidential and difficult to obtain. As suggested, we have presented a clearer summary of the findings based on different rights subjects as a way to present our target study outcomes. (Line 337-347, 528-541, 691-708)

“Since the interests of owners and benefits to be derived in the process of reusing construction land mainly include obtaining rental income, upgrading social facilities and preserving village culture. Therefore, the study believes that the way village collectives participate in the transformation of village industrial parks with land elements will mainly affect the social sustainability of village industrial parks. In the path of government storage, the change of ownership subject directly weakens the voice of village collectives in the transformation, and the social sustainability of industrial parks will be greatly weakened; in the path of land leasing, because the transfer of use rights divides the voice of village collectives in the transformation, the social sustainability of industrial parks will be unstable in the game of multiple parties; in the path of independent management, because the ownership subject does not change, village collectives hold the absolute voice, and the social sustainability of industrial parks will be significantly improved after the transformation.”

“Therefore, the study concludes that the way the market carries capital, management talent and labor elements to participate in the transformation of village industrial parks will mainly affect the economic sustainability of village industrial parks. In the regular rental path, although the scope of tenure increases, the ownership is still held by the village collective, and the economic sustainability of the industrial park will have unstable changes in the game between them; in the government support path, because the government intervenes to solve the contradiction between the village collective and the market, the industrial park will be more stable and economically sustainable; in the eliminate upon expiration path, because the subject of tenure changes, the economic sustainability will be restored; in the introduce enterprises path, the economic sustainability of the industrial park will be enhanced due to the increase of the production capacity of the right holder; in the path of autonomous operation, the economic sustainability of the industrial park will be enhanced due to the increase of the spatial function of the industrial park. ”

“Therefore, the study concludes that the government's participation in the transformation of village industrial parks with policy elements will be beneficial to ecological sustainability, but the impact on economic sustainability and social sustainability depends on the results of the game among government departments, village collectives and the market. In the land expropriation path, the ecological sustainability and social sustainability of industrial parks are enhanced because the government regulates land ownership, but the financial pressure brought by the expropriation will affect the economic sustainability; in the unified lease management path, the government advances funds to promote the market and village collectives to cooperate in the transformation, and supports high-tech industries to improve ecological sustainability, but it may also cause financial pressure to affect the economic sustainability; in the policy incentive path, the government provides special policy guidance for In the government guidance path, the government provides special policy guidance for enterprises to improve sustainability in all aspects, but due to the high cost of special policy formulation, the promotion is not strong; in the supervision and management path, the government does not regulate property rights in industrial parks, and the lack of government intervention leads to no significant improvement in sustainability in all aspects.”

6. The information presented in the section 6. Conclusions and Discussion is much developed but sounds more like a wider presentation of main results and a kind of Authors opinion than typical discussion.Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted in perspective of previous studies with references to literature items. Without any links to other studies related to the presented approach and study the value of the manuscript is lower.

As suggested we have made improvements to the conclusion section. We have linked the conclusions and discussion to existing studies and added reference citations. Where necessary, we have compared our important findings with existing studies and explained the conclusions of this study with the aid of existing studies to enhance the scientific validity of the views.(line 732-736;line763-765)

“The existing studies generally summarize three models of industrial park renovation from the perspective of leading subjects: government-led, market-led and village collective-led [48].While using “structure-participant” model, more paths can be listed by deeply analyzing the participation mechanism and element mastery of each subject. ”

“ The social sustainability under village collective-led path is higher，the economic sustainability of renovation under market-led path , and the ecological sustainability under government-led path. It has been shown that the resources, power and interests held by the dominant power players largely influence the effect of spatial transformation [50]. Thus further affecting the sustainablility.”

7. It is also not clear what are the main conclusions – they are generally not formulated, in my opinion.

As suggested，we have revised the Conclusions section to provide a clear and concise summary of the main findings .This paper further clarifies the following three conclusions: (1)Village collectives, market entities and governments may face a lack of structural elements, such as land, funds and policies, which will lead to 14 renovation paths.（Line 730-732）；(2)The sustainability of the village-level industrial park is led by the strongest voice among the village collective, the market entity and the government. The social sustainability under village collective-led path is higher，the economic sustainability of renovation under market-led path , and the ecological sustainability under government-led path.（Line 759-763）；(3)Different transformation paths are applied in different contexts, and should be chosen according to the basic conditions and transformation goals of village industrial parks. （Line 770-772）

“Village collectives, market entities and governments may face a lack of structural elements, such as land, funds and policies, which will lead to 14 renovation paths.”

“The sustainability of the village-level industrial park is led by the strongest voice among the village collective, the market entity and the government. The social sustainability under village collective-led path is higher，the economic sustainability of renovation under market-led path , and the ecological sustainability under government-led path.”

“Different transformation paths are applied in different contexts, and should be chosen according to the basic conditions and transformation goals of village industrial parks.”

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

·         The abstract should be rewritten as to show the main purpose of the study, methodology applied, new results and the author’s contribution to the science.

·         Taking into account the previous comment, the first three sentences are not the subject of writing an abstract of the study.

·         What is the main aim of your paper?

·         The introduction of the paper lacks a clearer explanation why is the topic of the study important for the research in terms of new scientific contribution?

·         The introduction should contain the main hypothesis of research and/or the key research questions.

·         What is the contribution of your study to the science? In the introduction of the paper, the author/s need to do a better job of situating this work in the existing literature and clearly stating the paper's novel contribution to that literature.

In the introduction of your paper, you stated “The main contribution of the research is the systematic analysis,…, so as to explore…”. However, these are research activities that will be used to achieve the aim of research and to realize the contribution to the science. But, what is the main aim of your study? What is the contribution of your study to the science?

·         The scientific contribution of the paper should stem from the main aim of the paper. Generally speaking, the paper lacks better connection and compatibility between the main aim of the paper, hypothesis, research methodology and contribution to the science.

·         In section 3.2.1. you stated “After the renovation, the annual output of the industrial park increased from CNY 10 million to CNY 5 263 billion, with tax revenue being increased from CNY 1 million to CNY 300 million. Under this scheme, a village collective can receive a one-time compensation fee of CNY 5 million for land acquisition, CNY 47 million for the share of revenue of the land transfer, and CNY 209 million for the balanced index fee.” Are these the results of your research? If not, references should be provided.

·         In section 5.2.1. of your study, you stated “The total tax revenue of the area in 2019 was about CNY 46.63 million, with the average tax revenue per month as only CNY 17,000, which is far lower than the average level of Dongguan City.” It is needed to provide the references for that statement.

·         In section 5.2.1. of your study, you stated “After centralized renovation, the government will enact a functional design based on the characteristics of the town, characterized by scattered green space,…”. Are these claims the results of your research? If not, it is needed to provide the references.

·         In section 5.2.4. of your study, you stated "After the transformation, the total investment in the park, including the two village committees of Xiantang and Xinhuaxi, will exceed CNY 10 billion, with 2.05 million square meters of new industrial facilities added, and the annual output value of the project is expected to reach CNY 12 billion after all projects are completed."  It is needed to provide the references for that statement.

·         The paper lacks the discussion of the results obtained, especially how they can be interpreted in perspective of previous studies. Also, try to discuss the findings and their implications in the broadest context possible, including working hypothesis/research questions etc., in order to highlight new results of your paper and its new contributions to the science. (Hint. It is needed to form section Discussion before the Conclusion)

·         In the conclusion of the paper, it is necessary to connect obtained results with the main aim of the research and the main hypothesis/research questions.

·         In the conclusion of the paper, it is needed to discuss on both theoretical and practical implications of the study.

·         In the last sentence of your research, you stated your own plans for future research. However, what are the suggestions for future research in terms of new scientific contributions?

Author Response

RESPONSE to the comments given by REVIEWER #2:

1. Taking into account the previous comment, the first three sentences are not the subject of writing an abstract of the study.What is the main aim of your paper?

As suggested, we have revised the abstract. (Line 11-26)

“Driven by manufacturing supply reform and regional industrial transformation and upgrading, village industrial parks are key areas for deepening urban renewal. The complex relationship between various property rights actors is a key factor limiting the sustainable development of village industrial parks, and thus attracts considerable research. However, existing research is limited to individual cases and lacks systematic approaches to provide effective guidance for the renovation of village industrial parks. In addition, the paper summarises the participation pathways and characteristics of 12 typical cases of village industrial parks in the PDRD. This is particularly true for rural industrial parks. The study identifies five scenarios based on the renewal of village collective ownership (government warehousing, land lease to developers, land lease to operating companies, land lease to enterprises, independent management); five situations based on the renewal of market enterprises' rights of use (regular leasing, government support, abolition on expiry, introduction of enterprises, autonomous management); and four situations based on the renewal of government management rights (land expropriation, unified lease management, policy stimulation, supervision and management). The results are valuable for the research of urban regeneration and sustainable development in the context of government ownership.”

2. The introduction of the paper lacks a clearer explanation why is the topic of the study important for the research in terms of new scientific contribution?The introduction should contain the main hypothesis of research and/or the key research questions. What is the contribution of your study to the science? In the introduction of the paper, the author/s need to do a better job of situating this work in the existing literature and clearly stating the paper's novel contribution to that literature. In the introduction of your paper, you stated “The main contribution of the research is the systematic analysis,…, so as to explore…”. However, these are research activities that will be used to achieve the aim of research and to realize the contribution to the science. But, what is the main aim of your study? What is the contribution of your study to the science?

As suggested, we have explained the aim of study in a more clear way, and expressed the contribution of study from relative respects. The research regarding methodology has been stressed. (Line 74-113)

“Existing studies have examined the property rights actors of village-level industrial parks in economically developed regions, such as the Pearl River Delta region, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, and the Yangtze River Delta, from the perspectives of the government, markets, and villages [7-9]. Research in the Pearl River Delta region has found that excessive government supervision limits the distribution of benefits among participants, weakens the production intensity of village-level industrial parks, leads to a lack of market attractiveness of projects, and limits the positivity of the market [10-12]. The dominance of the market and the reconfiguration of the land tenure structure will also affect changes in the state land system and limit the state's management of land [13,14]. In addition, government expropriation of collective land will lead to urban sprawl and generate social conflicts, for example by limiting villagers' income from land transfer and increasing the inability of residents who have lost their land to resettle [15-17].Studies in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region show that in the process of stakeholder participation in collective construction land, the unclear definition of construction land property rights leads to the establishment of incomplete collective rights of occupation, use, income and disposal, and the government has thus established implicit occupation rights over collective construction land [18]. Studies in the Yangtze River Delta region point out that the public, as the most fundamental stakeholder in industrial land redevelopment, is excluded from decision-making, which tends to neglect public interests [19-21]. In general, studies in the Pearl River Delta region emphasize private power, those in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region emphasize government power, and those in the Yangtze River Delta region emphasize market power [22-28]. At present, the research and institutional development of property rights actors in village-level industrial parks is still in its initial stage, and the analysis of property rights actors in village-level industrial parks mainly focuses on individual case studies, lacking systematic horizontal comparisons and summaries of different models. At the same time, China's village-level industrial parks involve complex property right actors; the current research shows that the cooperation mode has a certain influence on society, ecology, economy and politics, but there is a lack of in-depth analysis and attempts to develop theoretical frameworks on the operational mechanisms of multiple benefit play. Therefore, under the specific institutional environment of China, it is of great significance to study the sustainable development path of village-level industrial parks in order to construct the relevant theoretical model and analytical framework of cooperation among power subjects based on the influence of resources, rules and organisational concepts involved by different right subjects.

Using the 'structure-participant' model as an extension framework, the paper explores the environmental, economic and social culture of sustainable village industries and discusses a healthy and sustainable way of developing village industries. It also examines how these different pathways contribute to environmental, economic, social and cultural sustainability”

3. In section 3.2.1. you stated “After the renovation, the annual output of the industrial park increased from CNY 10 million to CNY 5 263 billion, with tax revenue being increased from CNY 1 million to CNY 300 million. Under this scheme, a village collective can receive a one-time compensation fee of CNY 5 million for land acquisition, CNY 47 million for the share of revenue of the land transfer, and CNY 209 million for the balanced index fee.” Are these the results of your research? If not, references should be provided.

Thanks for the suggestion. Most of the data for the article came from interviews with municipal natural resource bureaus in the Pearl River Delta or extracted from documents provided by natural resource bureaus. The data are not open data and have been licensed for use by the Natural Resources Bureau. Based on your comments, we will include footnotes explaining the source of our data.

“The undisclosed data are from "Operation Guide of Eight Modes of Industrial land redevelopment in Dongguan City" and "Introduction to Industrial Park Transformation in Towns and Villages of Dongguan City". Data are available with the permission of Dongguan Bureau of Natural Resource.”

4. In section 5.2.1. of your study, you stated “The total tax revenue of the area in 2019 was about CNY 46.63 million, with the average tax revenue per month as only CNY 17,000, which is far lower than the average level of Dongguan City.” It is needed to provide the references for that statement.

This data comes from the survey report of Dongguan Natural Resources Bureau on village industrial parks, and we have added relevant footnotes to explain the data source

“The undisclosed data are from "Brief introduction of Dongguan Water Town Future Industrial City project", provided by the Dongguan Municipal Bureau of Natural Resources. Data are available with the permission of Dongguan Bureau of Natural Resource.”

5. In section 5.2.1. of your study, you stated “After centralized renovation, the government will enact a functional design based on the characteristics of the town, characterized by scattered green space,…”. Are these claims the results of your research? If not, it is needed to provide the references.

This data comes from the survey report of Dongguan Natural Resources Bureau on village industrial parks. As per your suggestion, we have declared the source of the data in the footnote of the article.

“The undisclosed data are from "Brief introduction of Dongguan Water Town Future Industrial City project", provided by the Dongguan Municipal Bureau of Natural Resources. Data are available with the permission of Dongguan Bureau of Natural Resource.”

6. In section 5.2.4. of your study, you stated "After the transformation, the total investment in the park, including the two village committees of Xiantang and Xinhuaxi, will exceed CNY 10 billion, with 2.05 million square meters of new industrial facilities added, and the annual output value of the project is expected to reach CNY 12 billion after all projects are completed."  It is needed to provide the references for that statement.

Thanks for the suggestion. This data source is from the Foshan Urban Renewal Bureau's survey report on village-level industrial parks, and we have added relevant footnotes to explain the data source. If the publisher requests the original documents, we can provide the relevant documents upon request.

“The undisclosed data are from "Case study of village-level industrial park renovation in Foshan City", provided by the Foshan Urban Renewal Bureau.”

7. The paper lacks the discussion of the results obtained, especially how they can be interpreted in perspective of previous studies.Also, try to discuss the findings and their implications in the broadest context possible, including working hypothesis/research questions etc., in order to highlight new results of your paper and its new contributions to the science. (Hint. It is needed to form sectionDiscussion before the Conclusion)

As suggested, we have enhanced the discussion of the results. First, we have brought part of the discussion forward, and have discussed the importance of this study in a broader context (line 717-725). We have re-emphasized the purpose of our study (line 726-729). Second, we incorporate a comparison with existing studies and the necessary explanations for our conclusions (line 732-736; line 763-765),conclusion (1) reveal the 14 pathways summarized of our study, mainly based on the theoretical derivation using the "structure-participant" model .The principles and processes of derivation are detailed in sections 3.1/4.1/5.1 of the article and are therefore not explained in the conclusion.

“Urban renewal can be seen as a multi-power collaborative process[35,45]. In order to adapt to the complex urban renewal process, a more systematic and flexible urban renewal model is needed to ensure the benefit distribution, responsibility sharing and sustainable urban development among different power subjects.In the Pearl River Delta, the renovation of village-level industrial parks is driven by the dual forces of "top-down" and "bottom-up"[48], and it is affected by the capital market, the land property rights system, government control and other factors. The village-level industrial park is the urban space with the most complex power subjects[3,49], so it is important to clarify the internal logic of the participation of its power subjects in the transformation.”

“Therefore, this study aims to deeply analyze the participation mechanisms and paths of power subjects in the transformation of village industrial parks from the perspectives of owners, users and managers, and further summarize the sustainability and applicability of the paths.The conclusions are as follows.”

“The existing studies generally summarize three models of industrial park renovation from the perspective of leading subjects: government-led, market-led and village collective-led [48].While using “structure-participant” model, more paths can be listed by deeply analyzing the participation mechanism and element mastery of each subject. ”

“ It has been shown that the resources, power and interests held by the dominant power players largely influence the effect of spatial transformation [50]. Thus further affecting the sustainablility.”

       8.In the conclusion of the paper, it is necessary to connect obtained results with the main aim of the research and the mainhypothesis/research questions.

In the conclusion section, we restate the purpose of this study (Line 726-729) to ensure that our findings are consistent with the research objectives and research questions. The main purpose of this paper is to systematically summarize the transformation paths of village industrial parks in PRD from the perspective of the participation of power subjects, which corresponds to point (1) in the conclusion (Line 730-758); to analyze the sustainability of each path and its application through actual cases, which corresponds to points (2) and (3) in the conclusion (Line 759-782), and to provide insight for the future path selection of village industrial park transformation The analysis of the paths and their applicability through actual cases (Line 759-782) corresponds to points (2) and (3) in the conclusion, and provides inspiration for the path selection and sustainable development of village industrial park transformation in the future.

“Therefore, this study aims to deeply analyze the participation mechanisms and paths of power subjects in the transformation of village industrial parks from the perspectives of owners, users and managers, and further summarize the sustainability and applicability of the paths.The conclusions are as follows.”

“Village collectives, market entities and governments may face a lack of structural elements, such as land, funds and policies, which will lead to 14 renovation paths. The existing studies generally summarize three models of industrial park renovation from the perspective of leading subjects: government-led, market-led and village collective-led [48].While using “structure-participant” model, more paths can be listed by deeply analyzing the participation mechanism and element mastery of each subject. From the perspective of the owner, the characteristics of ownership are mainly reflected in one of the following five situations: When the village collective lacks market factors, usufruct rights will be established and transferred to developers, operators or enterprises (land leasing); when the village collective lacks policy elements, there will be a change in the ownership subject (government storage). When the village collective has all the structural elements, there is no change in ownership (independent management). From the perspective of the usufruct right holder, the characteristics of the usufruct rights are mainly reflected in one of the following five situations: When market entities lack policy elements, government support will facilitate the extension of the usufruct term. When market entities lack land elements, regular rental will expand the scope of usufruct rights. When there is a lack of labor factors, the introduction of enterprises will lead to an increase in the subject of the usufruct right. When the market entity suffers from a lack of funds and management talent, its elimination upon expiration will lead to a change in the subject of the usufruct right. When market entities have all the structural elements, there is no change in the usufruct right. From the perspective of the jurisdiction holder, the characteristics of the management rights are mainly reflected in one of the following four situations: When the government lacks land elements and market factors, it will participate in renovation through the regulation of ownership rights (land expropriation), the adjustment of ownership and usufruct rights (unified lease management) or the separate adjustment of usufruct rights (policy incentives). In the context of village-level industrial parks with all the required elements, the government only maintains jurisdiction by implementing existing policies (supervision and management).”

“The sustainability of the village-level industrial park is led by the strongest voice among the village collective, the market entity and the government. The social sustainability under village collective-led path is higher，the economic sustainability of renovation under market-led path , and the ecological sustainability under government-led path. It has been shown that the resources, power and interests held by the dominant power players largely influence the effect of spatial transformation [50]. Thus further affecting the sustainablility. For example, in the path of village collective self-management, village collectives with land elements have a greater voice. Their interests of retaining collective land property rights, continuing traditional village industries and preserving local culture are fully satisfied, thus the renovation gains high social sustainability.

Different transformation paths are applied in different contexts, and should be chosen according to the basic conditions and transformation goals of village industrial parks. Market-led paths, such as elimination upon expiration, the introduction of enterprises, autonomous operations and unified lease management, are applicable when greater economic sustainability, enhancements in space production functions and industrial upgrading are pursued in the renovation. The paths dominated by the village collective, such as land leasing, independent management and routine supervision, can be adopted when the village industrial park needs to ensure social sustainability and there are regional characteristics, customs, cultures and traditional industries that need to be preserved. Government-led paths, such as government storage and land expropriation, can be chosen when a fairer distribution of public resources and an increase in public services are required, as well as hopes to reduce the negative externalities and enhance the ecological sustainability”

      9. In the conclusion of the paper, it is needed to discuss on both theoretical and practical implications of the study.

As suggested，we now explicitly discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our research.(Line 783-799)

“The main theoretical contributions of this study is that we proposed a more systematic, comprehensive and universal framework for the participation paths of property right actors in village-level industrial parks. Compared with empirical research on a single case, this study compared and discussed the macro conditions of rural industrialization in the Pearl River Delta region, reasonably distinguished the relevant objects and conditions of different paths, and coordinated land, capital, management talents, labor, policies and other elements to establish a complete system of available renovation paths. Under the context of ownership by the people, this study explored how property right actors with different means of production cooperate, and how best to distribute land resources in relation to complex property rights, thus enriching the research on urban renewal theory, and providing much-improved research methods and concepts related to the complexities of power in urban renewal.As for the Practical implications, the study investigates the pre-renovation conditions, renovation methods and effects of the representative cases of each path and analyzes their sustainability, summarizing the applicable contexts of different paths.It provides a basis for path selection for future industrial park renovation and sustainable urban renewal practices, enhancing the rationality of decision making.”

 

       10.In the last sentence of your research, you stated your own plans for future research. However, what are the suggestions for future research in terms of new scientific contributions?

We have revised the last paragraph. Our recommendations for future research include three main points（Line 800-816）:

(1)Future research should scientifically evaluate the sustainability of the renovation paths and find out the influencing factors through quantitative methods.

(2)Future research should pay more attention to the village-level industrial parks mixed with collective land and state-owned land, and explore their sustainable development path.

(3) Future research should compare the renovation paths in the context of different land systems .

 

The main scientific contributions of these future studies are as follows: 

(1)To enhance the depth and scientificity of sustainability effect evaluation of village industrial parks, to explore the sustainability impact mechanism of village industrial parks;

(2)To further improve the transformation path system of village industrial parks from an international perspective，and understand the path differences of inefficient industrial land transformation in different countries.

“Although this study provides practical insights relevant to the renovation of village-level industrial parks, some aspects still need to be improved. Firstly, regarding the "structure–participant" structural model itself, the path analysis method based on case analysis has certain limitations in the study of sustainable development, Future research should scientifically evaluate the sustainability of the renovation paths and find out the influencing factors through quantitative methods. Secondly, some village-level industrial parks in China contain both collective land and state-used land. Therefore the participation and power relations are more complex than is suggested by theoretical approaches. The selection of empirical cases in the future research should pay more attention to the village-level industrial parks mixed with collective land and state-owned land, and explore their sustainable development path.  Finally, given that the cases and data are from China, the results can thus only reflect the power and resources of stakeholders in village-level industrial park renovation in China. the conditions of which are significantly different from those of other countries where land is privatized. Future research should compare the renovation paths in the context of different land systems to provide a more universal experience for the sustainable renewal of industrial land worldwide.”

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I appreciate all works done by Authors, the main suggestions has been implemented in all sections. The study design is more clearly presented after corrections.

Main Comments:

1. The title is more general and fits better to the presented study..

2. The Abstract is also acceptable after correction, rather general but clear.

3. The Introduction keep the main valuable background of the study, the literature has been not developed, but the present form of presentation can be accepted.

The main aim of the study is better presented in separate part, and is understandable for readers, also linked better to the data and information presented in next sections.

4. The used methods based on the presentation of ‘paths’ has descriptive form but includes the main explanation of the following steps of the study; taking into account the idea and scope of the study, it has a value, even if could be more compact. Added/improved parts make it a bit more clear for readers, however still a bit difficult to repeat, in my opinion.

5. Also the presentation of the wide scope of obtained results has been improved, their presentation is rather long but more deep after corrections, thus more valuable.

6. The section 6 Conclusions and Discussions is kept in very descriptive form, including some general conclusions, and thus can be accepted.

Others:

- some more international literature still could be added to develop more the scientific soundness of the study, however, regarding it is focused on very specific area, the literature included in the manuscript is acceptable.

Summing up, the topic is very interesting and the presented approach is a kind of innovative. The main form of presentation has been improved what highlights more the general value of the study. I can recommend publication of the manuscript in its present form.

Reviewer 2 Report

-