The Impact of Establishment of Nature Reserves on the Urban–Rural Income Gap: Evidence from County-Level Analysis in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article "The impact of nature reserve establishment on the urban-rural income gap: Evidence from county-level analysis in China" appears to examine the impact of nature reserve establishment on the urban-rural income difference in China.

The following sections comprise the article: Introduction, Methodology and Data, Results and Discussion, and Conclusion.

The paper introduces an intriguing topic and investigates the possible influence of nature reserves on China's urban-rural wealth disparity. However, after thorough evaluation of the paper, I discovered significant concerns with the methodology, data analysis, and general presentation that must be corrected before the work is considered for publication. Please find my comments and suggestions for possible correction of the paper.

Major Comments:

The key research question is not expressed very clearly in the article's opening. The major research question must be stated clearly, and credible justifications must be presented to support the authors' belief that nature reserves will have an influence on the urban-rural income disparity in China. The authors attempt to present information on economic progress, dual economic structures between rural and urban regions, income disparities between rural and urban areas, and the presence of natural reserves. However, the authors do not include adequate references to back up the assertions made in the paper's introduction. Furthermore, the paper's introduction is not written in a methodical manner. In other words, the concepts and material presented in the paper's introduction do not follow a logical order. Finally, the opening section of the article was not written entirely according to formal language principles and contains some grammatical errors.

The second section of the article leaps right into "Methodology and Data." Although the authors attempt to evaluate the literature in the introduction section, I would prefer to have a separate literature review in the second section of the study rather than the "Methodology and Data" section.

There are a few concerns with the methodological approach. The first issue here is that the authors do not explain why they chose to employ a fixed effect model in sufficient detail. The writers must expound on this point. The second issue with the paper's methodology and data section is that it fails to include several critical control variables in the study, such as education levels, access to healthcare, and infrastructural development. These variables can have a major impact on income discrepancies between urban and rural locations, thereby confounding the observed findings. Due to the lack of control variables, the study may suffer from omitted variable bias. This bias has the potential to have a considerable influence on the reported results and interpretations.

Another issue is that the methodology section lacks a clear explanation of the data collecting procedure. The article does not go into enough detail about the dependability of the data. It appears that the statistics are drawn from statistical yearbooks of several provinces. However, neither the level of data nor the veracity of the data was examined. To improve the study's credibility, it is critical to confirm the data's accuracy and applicability for the research objectives.

Furthermore, there is considerable uncertainty in the interpretation of the primary results. The interpretations concerning the association between nature reserves and the urban-rural income divide in the findings and discussion section lack sufficient evidence to justify such conclusions. As a result, the policy consequences and substantial findings are incompatible.

The findings are likewise unclear. The results given do not fully support the conclusions derived from the data analysis. The limits and uncertainties in the findings should be addressed explicitly in the text. Furthermore, the authors are expected to connect the findings of this study to the findings of related studies in the literature.

Overall, the theoretical framework falls short of fully explaining the link between nature reserves and economic disparities between urban and rural areas. A well-founded theoretical framework would strengthen the study's claims. The review of the literature is quite brief and fails to situate the study in the context of previous research on income disparity and nature reserves in China. The literature review should be treated as a separate element.

Recommendations:

Revise the methodology section to incorporate a more rigorous theoretical framework and a clear explanation of the data collecting approach, as well as the essential control variables mentioned above.

Provide a clear description of data sources, their dependability, and any constraints connected with their usage to address data limitations.

To assure the study's importance in the larger academic environment, provide a more thorough theoretical framework and broaden the literature review.

Extend the explanations of the significant results by connecting them to the current literature. Give some concrete policy consequences.

Have a competent editor proofread the manuscript and rectify any grammatical errors.

Have a competent editor proofread the manuscript and rectify any grammatical errors.

Author Response

Reviewer 1

1. The key research question is not expressed very clearly in the article's opening. The major research question must be stated clearly, and credible justifications must be presented to support the authors' belief that nature reserves will have an influence on the urban-rural income disparity in China. The authors attempt to present information on economic progress, dual economic structures between rural and urban regions, income disparities between rural and urban areas, and the presence of natural reserves. However, the authors do not include adequate references to back up the assertions made in the paper's introduction. Furthermore, the paper's introduction is not written in a methodical manner. In other words, the concepts and material presented in the paper's introduction do not follow a logical order.Finally, the opening section of the article was not written entirely according to formal language principles and contains some grammatical errors.

Reply: The introduction section has been rewritten and the adequate references to back up the assertions have been added following the reviewer’s comments (lines 28-44).

2. The second section of the article leaps right into "Methodology and Data." Although the authors attempt to evaluate the literature in the introduction section, I would prefer to have a separate literature review in the second section of the study rather than the "Methodology and Data" section.

Reply: A literature review section has now been added following the reviewer’s recommendation (lines 66-125).

3. There are a few concerns with the methodological approach. The first issue here is that the authors do not explain why they chose to employ a fixed effect model in sufficient detail. The writers must expound on this point. The second issue with the paper's methodology and data section is that it fails to include several critical control variables in the study, such as education levels, access to healthcare, and infrastructural development. These variables can have a major impact on income discrepancies between urban and rural locations, thereby confounding the observed findings. Due to the lack of control variables, the study may suffer from omitted variable bias. This bias has the potential to have a considerable influence on the reported results and interpretations.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestions. The fixed-effect model can alleviate the problem of missing variables, because the regional fixed effect is added to the model, which can eliminate the model bias caused by regional heterogeneity to a certain extent. The data used in this paper are at the county-level, whereas there is a lack of appropriate data on education, health care and infrastructure in county statistical yearbooks. Thus, based on data availability, this study chooses agricultural development, industrial development, fiscal policy and population density, which are closely related to urban and rural income, as the control variables of the study.

4. Another issue is that the methodology section lacks a clear explanation of the data collecting procedure. The article does not go into enough detail about the dependability of the data. It appears that the statistics are drawn from statistical yearbooks of several provinces. However, neither the level of data nor the veracity of the data was examined. To improve the study's credibility, it is critical to confirm the data's accuracy and applicability for the research objectives.

Reply: In this paper, per capita disposable income of rural residents and urban residents at county level are mainly derived from statistical yearbooks of relevant provinces, if relevant data are missing from the provincial statistical yearbook, supplement it from the statistical bulletins of each county and district. The data of other control variables were obtained from the China County Economic Statistical Yearbook. The relevant data of NRs are obtained from the National List of NRs. This information has been added in methods. It can be seen that the main social and economic data in this paper come from the statistical yearbook, which is a large reference book that comprehensively, systematically and continuously records the annual economic, social and other aspects of development through highly intensive statistical data, so it is authoritative. This information has been added in lines 146-150.

5. Furthermore, there is considerable uncertainty in the interpretation of the primary results. The interpretations concerning the association between nature reserves and the urban-rural income divide in the findings and discussion section lack sufficient evidence to justify such conclusions. As a result, the policy consequences and substantial findings are incompatible. The findings are likewise unclear. The results given do not fully support the conclusions derived from the data analysis.

The limits and uncertainties in the findings should be addressed explicitly in the text. Furthermore, the authors are expected to connect the findings of this study to the findings of related studies in the literature.

Reply: The discussion on limitation and uncertainties have been added in lines 314-325. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first compressive study evaluating the effects of NRs establishment on the urban-rural income gap. However, we have compared our findings to the studies investigating the effect of NRs on the local residents’ income (lines 232-238, 292-295, 310-311). The policy suggestions are only an ideal state based on the analysis of research results at present, and there are certainly some problems in the course of practical operation. Nevertheless, such a proposal is also a reflection on the balance between the establishment of protected areas in different regions and economic development.

6. Overall, the theoretical framework falls short of fully explaining the link between nature reserves and economic disparities between urban and rural areas. A well-founded theoretical framework would strengthen the study's claims. The review of the literature is quite brief and fails to situate the study in the context of previous research on income disparity and nature reserves in China. The literature review should be treated as a separate element. Recommendations: Revise the methodology section to incorporate a more rigorous theoretical framework and a clear explanation of the data collecting approach, as well as the essential control variables mentioned above.

Reply: A framework has been added (lines 122-129). The literature review has been expanded and treated as a separate element (lines 67-123).

7. Provide a clear description of data sources, their dependability, and any constraints connected with their usage to address data limitations.

Reply: In this paper, per capita disposable income of rural residents and urban residents at county level are mainly derived from statistical yearbooks of relevant provinces, if relevant data are missing from the provincial statistical yearbook, supplement it from the statistical bulletins of each county and district. The data of other control variables were obtained from the China County Economic Statistical Yearbook. The relevant data of NRs are obtained from the National List of NRs. This information has been added in methods (lines 146-150).

8. To assure the study's importance in the larger academic environment, provide a more thorough theoretical framework and broaden the literature review.

Reply: A framework has been added (lines 122-129). The literature review has been expanded and treated as a separate element (lines 67-129).

9. Extend the explanations of the significant results by connecting them to the current literature. Give some concrete policy consequences. Have a competent editor proofread the manuscript and rectify any grammatical errors.

Reply: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first compressive study evaluating the effects of NRs establishment on the urban-rural income gap. However, we have compared our findings to the studies investigating the effect of NRs on the local residents’ income (lines 232-238, 292-295, 310-311). The manuscript has now been proofread by an English expert and revised accordingly.

Reviewer 2 Report

Originality The manuscript titled "The Impact of the Establishment of Nature Reserves on the Urban-Rural Income Gap: Evidence from County-Level Analysis in China" contains new and significant information on ecological issues and biodiversity that justifies publication. The various sections are well-written.

Relationship to Literature The paper demonstrates an adequate understanding of the relevant literature on nature reserves, ecological issues, and biodiversity and cites an appropriate range of literature sources. Additionally, essential literature resources related to this area of research were reviewed and situated in their proper place. Most of the papers reviewed are recent and relevant.

Methodology The paper's argument is built on an appropriate framework and base of concepts or other ideas. The paper is based on an argument tied to appropriate theory and concepts. Given the quantitative nature of the research, the author constructed a fixed-effects model to explore how the 88 urban-rural income gap corresponds to changes after the establishment of protected areas. Particularly, an elaborate quantitative analysis was conducted with a very good interpretation.

Results/Findings The findings/results are presented clearly. The findings indicated that establishing NRs is beneficial for narrowing the income gap between urban and rural areas, especially for the western and northeastern regions. Additionally, it was established that the establishment of national-level NRs demonstrated a more significant promoting effect on narrowing the urban-rural income gap.

Implications for research, practice, and/or society The study reported the research and practical implications for the sustainable development of nature reserves, addressing ecological issues, and promoting biodiversity in China.

Quality of Communication The paper pays attention to the clarity of expression, sentences, and tenses. It is also readable, and technical terms used in the field of environmental regulation, nature reserves, addressing ecological issues, and promoting biodiversity in China.

Confidential Comments to the Editor-in-Chief Thanks for entrusting me with this review. The paper is exciting and promising. I recommend publication because the study provides evidence that NRs establishment alleviates the urban-rural income gap in China. It is well-researched and well-written with valuable theoretical and practical contributions. The paper pays attention to the clarity of expression, sentences, and tenses. It is also readable, and technical terms used in the field of environmental regulation, nature reserves, addressing ecological issues. The conclusion was lumped together with the implications.

Author Response

Reviewer 2

1. Originality The manuscript titled "The Impact of the Establishment of Nature Reserves on the Urban-Rural Income Gap: Evidence from County-Level Analysis in China" contains new and significant information on ecological issues and biodiversity that justifies publication. The various sections are well-written.

Relationship to Literature The paper demonstrates an adequate understanding of the relevant literature on nature reserves, ecological issues, and biodiversity and cites an appropriate range of literature sources. Additionally, essential literature resources related to this area of research were reviewed and situated in their proper place. Most of the papers reviewed are recent and relevant.

Methodology The paper's argument is built on an appropriate framework and base of concepts or other ideas. The paper is based on an argument tied to appropriate theory and concepts. Given the quantitative nature of the research, the author constructed a fixed-effects model to explore how the 88 urban-rural income gap corresponds to changes after the establishment of protected areas. Particularly, an elaborate quantitative analysis was conducted with a very good interpretation.

Results/Findings The findings/results are presented clearly. The findings indicated that establishing NRs is beneficial for narrowing the income gap between urban and rural areas, especially for the western and northeastern regions. Additionally, it was established that the establishment of national-level NRs demonstrated a more significant promoting effect on narrowing the urban-rural income gap.

Implications for research, practice, and/or society. The study reported the research and practical implications for the sustainable development of nature reserves, addressing ecological issues, and promoting biodiversity in China.

Quality of Communication The paper pays attention to the clarity of expression, sentences, and tenses. It is also readable, and technical terms used in the field of environmental regulation, nature reserves, addressing ecological issues, and promoting biodiversity in China.

Confidential Comments to the Editor-in-Chief Thanks for entrusting me with this review. The paper is exciting and promising. I recommend publication because the study provides evidence that NRs establishment alleviates the urban-rural income gap in China. It is well-researched and well-written with valuable theoretical and practical contributions. The paper pays attention to the clarity of expression, sentences, and tenses. It is also readable, and technical terms used in the field of environmental regulation, nature reserves, addressing ecological issues. The conclusion was lumped together with the implications.

Reply: Thank you very much.

Reviewer 3 Report

Overall, the abstract provides a clear overview of the research design, questions, hypotheses, and methods employed in the study.

Overall, the arguments and discussion of findings in the section are well-organized, supported by data and analysis, and provide a balanced view of the impact of NRs on the urban-rural income gap in China. The conclusions drawn are compelling and relevant for policymakers and researchers in the field of ecological conservation and economic development.

The results of the empirical research are clearly presented, making it easy for readers to grasp the key findings and understand the impact of NRs on the urban-rural income gap in China. The use of tables and figures enhances the clarity of the presentation, and the interpretations and discussions are thorough and insightful.

The conclusions drawn in the article are well-supported by the empirical findings and the thorough analysis of the data.

The limitations of the study as well as further research needs or suggestions for future studies are not explicitly addressed in the provided excerpt. It would be good to include that.

The quality of English language in the article appears to be generally good. The writing is coherent and well-structured, making it easy to follow the flow of ideas. The use of academic language and terminology is appropriate for the subject matter, indicating a good understanding of the research topic. The article uses formal language, as expected in scholarly publications.
There are some minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings in certain parts of the text, but they do not significantly impede the overall understanding of the content. Some sentences could be improved for clarity and conciseness.
Additionally, the article uses proper citations and references to support the claims and findings. The citation style appears to be consistent and in line with academic standards.

Author Response

Reviewer 3

1．Overall, the abstract provides a clear overview of the research design, questions, hypotheses, and methods employed in the study.

Overall, the arguments and discussion of findings in the section are well-organized, supported by data and analysis, and provide a balanced view of the impact of NRs on the urban-rural income gap in China. The conclusions drawn are compelling and relevant for policymakers and researchers in the field of ecological conservation and economic development.

The results of the empirical research are clearly presented, making it easy for readers to grasp the key findings and understand the impact of NRs on the urban-rural income gap in China. The use of tables and figures enhances the clarity of the presentation, and the interpretations and discussions are thorough and insightful.

The conclusions drawn in the article are well-supported by the empirical findings and the thorough analysis of the data.

The limitations of the study as well as further research needs or suggestions for future studies are not explicitly addressed in the provided except. It would be good to include that.

Reply: The discussion on limitation and uncertainties have been added in lines 314-325.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English language in the article appears to be generally good. The writing is coherent and well-structured, making it easy to follow the flow of ideas. The use of academic language and terminology is appropriate for the subject matter, indicating a good understanding of the research topic. The article uses formal language, as expected in scholarly publications.

2. There are some minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings in certain parts of the text, but they do not significantly impede the overall understanding of the content. Some sentences could be improved for clarity and conciseness. Additionally, the article uses proper citations and references to support the claims and findings. The citation style appears to be consistent and in line with academic standards.

Reply: The manuscript has now been proofread by an English expert and revised accordingly.