Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Action Path of Environmental Governance on Carbon Emissions: A Case Study of Urban Agglomerations in the Yellow River Basin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review report of the paper sustainability-2559441.

 

A review of the article sustainability-2559441 has been carried out. The paper deals with a current topic. The method adopted has enabled the authors to obtain interesting results that deserve to be published. But before any publication, several minor and major corrections must be made to this work.

 

Present some statistics in your abstract. It can be statistics related to the evolution of carbon emissions. It is not normal for an abstract to have no numbers.

At the end of your abstract, give the usefulness of your results. Say concretely what your results can be used for.

Define abbreviations when first used in the text.

The authors are sometimes miscited (lines 74 and 75 for example). Correct this problem throughout the text.

A research article has well-known parts. It should not be structured like an academic dissertation. Therefore, Section 2 has no place in this work. This whole part should be removed.

Regarding section 3, it must become section 2. In the latter, the first subsection must present the study area. The second must present the data and its sources. In the third subsection, you must present all the methods for processing your data.

None of your maps have the coordinates. The location map must have the coordinates. For the other maps that appear in the “results” section, we can tolerate that they do not have coordinates, but not for the location map.

Nowhere in the text do you discuss your results. Discuss your results with those of similar studies done before yours.

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, I have downloaded and carefully read the above article and quoted the content of the article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.Present some statistics in your abstract. It can be statistics related to the evolution of carbon emissions. It is not normal for an abstract to have no numbers.

I have carefully added the data related to the evolution of carbon emissions from urban agglomerations in the Yellow River Basin into the abstract to enrich the content of this article.

2.At the end of your abstract, give the usefulness of your results. Say concretely what your results can be used for.

I took to add a concluding statement at the end of the abstract and to emphasize the practical effects of the research findings carefully.

3.Define abbreviations when first used in the text.

I have been careful to use the full description for abbreviations that first used in this article.

4.The authors are sometimes miscited (lines 74 and 75 for example). Correct this problem throughout the text.

I corrected the misquoted documents and checked the quoted documents allin the paper carefully.

5.A research article has well-known parts. It should not be structured like an academic dissertation. Therefore, Section 2 has no place in this work. This whole part should be removed.

I carefully deleted the second section of the article and adjusted the structure of this paper.

6.Regarding section 3, it must become section 2. In the latter, the first subsection must present the study area. The second must present the data and its sources. In the third subsection, you must present all the methods for processing your data.

I carefully changed the contents of the third section into the second section, and adjusted the order of the contents of the third section. The first part is the research area, the second part is the data and its sources, and the third part is the methods and models used in data processing.

7.None of your maps have the coordinates. The location map must have the coordinates. For the other maps that appear in the “results” section, we can tolerate that they do not have coordinates, but not for the location map.

I carefully added coordinates to the location map.

8.Nowhere in the text do you discuss your results. Discuss your results with those of similar studies done before yours.

I carefully adjusted the content of the last section of this paper, discussed the research results of this paper, and pointed out the characteristics of the research results.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have presented the role of environment governance on carbon emission specifically focused on for yellow river basin of China. The manuscript is well supported by results and analytical measures to defend the concluding remarks. However, there are a few suggestions to further strengthen the quality for a technical manuscript.

                Authors are suggested to include the full form of abbreviations at the first place of their appearance in the manuscript.

                Authors should avoid to addresses themselves as “we” throughout the manuscript, rather form the sentence as third party.

                Section 5.2 should come up before conclusion of the manuscript.  

                Authors should also elaborate that why the chosen study period is up to 2020.

 

Language is fine, minor editing is required.

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, I have downloaded and carefully read the above article and quoted the content of the article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.Authors are suggested to include the full form of abbreviations at the first place of their appearance in the manuscript.

I have taken care to add abbreviations that include the full form in the first place where the abbreviations appear in the original in this paper.

2.Authors should avoid to addresses themselves as “we” throughout the manuscript, rather form the sentence as third party.

I carefully avoided using “we”in the text and used a “this paper” instead.

3.Section 5.2 should come up before conclusion of the manuscript.  

I readjusted the content of 5.2 and put it before the conclusion carefully.

4.Authors should also elaborate that why the chosen study period is up to 2020.

 I carefully re-collected the data from 2008 to 2021, carried out moving smoothing and exponential smoothing on the missing data, and recalculated the experimental results.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1. Please explain the reason for the data as of 2020. I believe that incomplete data is not a reasonable reason.

2. To avoid using the first person in a paper, the work, research, etc. should be used.

3. The abstract should clearly state the main significance and research motivation of the paper.

4. The introduction is too long, it is recommended to separate it from the literature review.

 

5.The main contributions of this article should be clearly stated.

6. The applicability of the method needs to be explained in detail. Why this method is used should be compared through multiple methods.

7. Add a separate discussion section to compare the research results of this article with those of domestic and foreign scholars. Highlight the innovative points of this article.

8.The conclusion is too long and should not be repeated.

9. Add shortcomings and prospects for research in the paper.

 Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, I have downloaded and carefully read the above article and quoted the content of the article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1. Please explain the reason for the data as of 2020. I believe that incomplete data is not a reasonable reason.

I carefully re-collected the data from 2008 to 2021, carried out moving smoothing and exponential smoothing on the missing data, and recalculated the experimental results.

2. To avoid using the first person in a paper, the work, research, etc. should be used.

I carefully avoided using “we”in the text and used a “this paper” instead.

3. The abstract should clearly state the main significance and research motivation of the paper.

I carefully re-improved the content of the abstract and increased the research significance and motivation of this paper.

4. The introduction is too long, it is recommended to separate it from the literature review.

I separate the literature review in the introduction of Section 1 into Section 2 carefully.

5.The main contributions of this article should be clearly stated.

I have placed the main contribution of this article in the Section 5 carefully.

6. The applicability of the method needs to be explained in detail. Why this method is used should be compared through multiple methods.

I explain the applicability of the method in this paper, and in the section 2 compare the various methods and explain why this method is used in this paper.

7. Add a separate discussion section to compare the research results of this article with those of domestic and foreign scholars. Highlight the innovative points of this article.

I took to add a separate discussion section at the end of this paper and highlight the characteristics of the article. The innovation points of this paper are also introduced at the end of this paper.
   8.The conclusion is too long and should not be repeated.

I revised the conclusion and deleted the repeated descriptions carefully.

9. Add shortcomings and prospects for research in the paper.

At the end of the article, I carefully added the shortcomings and  prospects for research of this paper.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This work has some potential, the results obtained are interesting and deserve to be disclosed, as they could provide useful information to policymakers. The analysis conducted follows a good logical-mathematical scheme, the models are well described and the format required by the journal is respected. Regarding the graphs shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6, it's necessary to insert the axis names for better comprehension. In Table 1, have to improve the aspect, especially of row "standard conversion factor". In the introduction, you have written "Global warming has now become an urgent concern all over the world..."; what are the causes of this? In my opinion, is necessary to increase this aspect by inserting more citations aimed to highlight the causes. I suggest some specific citations to insert in the introduction paragraph: "Temperature trend analysis and investigation on a case of variability climate"

"Placement optimization of biodiesel production plant by means of centroid mathematical method"

"Measurement and modeling of ground-level ozone concentration in Catania, Italy using biophysical remote sensing and GIS"

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, I have downloaded and carefully read the above article and quoted the content of the article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.Regarding the graphs shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6, it's necessary to insert the axis names for better comprehension. In Table 1, have to improve the aspect, especially of row "standard conversion factor".  In the introduction, you have written "Global warming has now become an urgent concern all over the world...";  what are the causes of this?  In my opinion, is necessary to increase this aspect by inserting more citations aimed to highlight the causes.

 

 I carefully I readjusted the content of the article and added data axis and axis name to the Figure4, 5, and 6 in the manuscript for better understanding. I re-modified the contents of Table 1, especially the "standard conversion factor", which I re-adjusted. I have revised the concluding description language in the introduction to add scientific description and explanation.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Review report of the paper sustainability-2559441-v2

 

 

This article cannot yet be published as it stands. The authors claim to have incorporated all remarks, but this is not the case.

The location map does not always have coordinates.

I asked to delete section 2 (literature review), but it was not done. This section does not exist in a scientific article. This is a section exclusively reserved for university dissertations. In a scientific article, the literature review is done in the introduction.

The "Research design" section was not always titled "Data and methods".

The discussion must be separated from the conclusion. It can be the subject of a section, or be associated with the results, but in no case can it be associated with the conclusion as is done in this work.

The authors are always misquoted in the text. Authors did not always consult the journal's instructions to authors or other previously published articles to see how authors are cited in the text.

 

If these remarks are not properly integrated into the next review, I will be obliged to send this paperback.

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.The location map does not always have coordinates.

I have carefully added coordinates to all the location maps in this article as you requested.

2.I asked to delete section 2 (literature review), but it was not done. This section does not exist in a scientific article. This is a section exclusively reserved for university dissertations. In a scientific article, the literature review is done in the introduction.

The section 2 of the Manuscript is “Mechanism Analysis and Research Hypothesis”, which I deleted after your first suggestion. On the advice of other experts, I have separated the literature review into the section 2, and now I am following your advice to merge the literature review into the section 1 “Introduction” and revise the literature review.

3.The "Research design" section was not always titled "Data and methods".

I checked the paper and found that "Data and methods" did not appear. As requested, I adjusted the title of section 2 to make this paper more standardized.

4.The discussion must be separated from the conclusion. It can be the subject of a section, or be associated with the results, but in no case can it be associated with the conclusion as is done in this work.

I have divided the discussion and conclusion of this article into section 4 “Discussions” section 5 “Conclusions” according to your request carefully.

5.The authors are always misquoted in the text. Authors did not always consult the journal's instructions to authors or other previously published articles to see how authors are cited in the text.

In view of the problem of misquoting in the article, I checked all the quoted papers and re-consulted the relevant research results. I standardized the citation format of this article by looking at the papers published in the journal.

 

This paper has undergone English language editing by MDPI.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu.

Reviewer 3 Report

Accept in present form

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.Accept in present form.

Thank you for your valuable advice. I made some changes to the paper at the request of other experts. This paper has undergone English language editing by MDPI.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu

Reviewer 4 Report

The suggestions proposed, especially to improve the poor references, weren't considered. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1. The suggestions proposed, especially to improve the poor references, weren't considered.

I have carefully added coordinates to all the location maps in this article as you requested. I have divided the discussion and conclusion of this article into section 4 “Discussions” section 5 “Conclusions” according to your request carefully, and a discussion of the shortcomings of this paper has been added to the section 4 “Discussions”. In view of the problem of misquoting in the article, I checked all the quoted papers and re-consulted the relevant research results. I standardized the citation format of this article by looking at the papers published in the journal. This paper has undergone English language editing by MDPI.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Review report of the paper sustainability-2559441-v3

 

The authors of the article sustainability-2559441-v3 have corrected their article satisfactorily. It can be published as is. Section 2 could be titled Data and Methods and subsection 2.3 could be titled Data Analysis.

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.The authors of the article sustainability-2559441-v3 have corrected their article satisfactorily. It can be published as is. Section 2 could be titled Data and Methods and subsection 2.3 could be titled Data Analysis.

Thank you for your recognition of this article. Thanks for your previous guidance. I have revised it according to your suggestions, and section 2 be titled “Data and Methods”, and subsection 2.3 be titled “Data Analysis”. If you do not have any suggestions, please select “Yes” from the options in the “Review Report Form”. This paper has undergone English language editing by MDPI.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu.

Reviewer 4 Report

I haven't suggestions 

Author Response

Dear reviewer，

Thank you again for your guidance on my article, here are the modifications I made to the article according to your opinion.

1.I haven't suggestions .

Thank you for your previous guidance. I have made modifications according to the opinions of other reviewers. If you do not have any suggestions, please select “Yes” from the options in the “Review Report Form”. This paper has undergone English language editing by MDPI.

Thank you again for your valuable comments on this article, wishing you many years of joy and happiness. 

 

Yours sincerely，

  Mr Liu