North–South Differences and Formation Mechanisms of Green Finance in Chinese Cities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The green economy is a phenomenon that is transforming the reality of many nations around the world in multiple aspects, whether economic, social, political or cultural. Green financing has improved the industrial structure in promoting the efficiency of the green economy, where the financial system and education are one of the critical success variables in this collective enterprise.

 

Through their work, the authors are able to identify and prove the differences between the north and south of China through the presentation of indices relating to green investment, green support, the green fund and green capital. The present work presents an excellent questioning of an emerging reality, focusing on essential variables so that we can understand the phenomenon under study. The level of development and theoretical relevance is remarkable and we can see it through the methodological formulation and empirical discussion of the phenomenon in China, with a series of recommendations that are apparently essential to us as a demonstration of scientific competence.

 

There is a clear demonstration that there is an explicit regional heterogeneity where the dimensions explain the differences in green financing in an urban context. On the other hand, it was found that funds and green credit are the most obvious problems. The country should undertake efforts to resolve the differences in green financing where southern provinces can reduce the gap in green financing by increasing the level of green funds and green credits. I think the article is well written so that any and all individuals with more or less relationship with the topic can understand the current phenomenon of the green economy and its present and future importance for citizens and society.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I have read the paper with interest. Although the study reveals some insights and empirical evidence on the subject matter, I have serious concerns on the manuscript, which are listed below.  

·         Authors should not use causality words such as “influence” since the current data and methods may only provide results for associations for variables of interest.

·         Table 6 does not display much about regression results. How many observations are included? Why intercepts are zero? Are there any control variables?

·         Are there any diagnostic results for regressions?

·         “Most pass the significance test under a certain level of significance.” This statement is not acceptable for a scientific article. Authors should provide precise level of significance and interpret results accordingly.

·         Table 5 is not self-explanatory.  What would be the difference between Row 1 and Row2? All rows and columns are named as “green finance”.

·         “There may be a Multicollinearity problem among the explanatory variables.” Did authors test for presence of this problem. Empirical findings should be provided.

·         Data sources should be fully and clearly stated and referenced.

·         Authors should justify their choice of methods for data analysis. For instance, why they do adopt the entropy weight method?  Are there alternative methods to construct indexes?

·         There are no robustness checks for empirical findings.

·         Conclusion section should be revised to exclude discussions referring to numbers, statistics, etc.

·         The manuscript should be revised for spelling and language corrections.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

In fact, the paper investigates relevant issues related to formation mechanisms of green finance. However, the paper has some major flaws, which need serious considerations:

Abstract

·        The abstract needs to be written in a way to attract the attention of readers. Thus, some structural modifications are needed to make it more attractive.  The authors may begin the abstract with the purpose of the study.  Next, the significance or background of the study can be provided.  The methodology of the study should be presented. Then, the findings and, finally, 2-3 implications can boost the attractiveness of the study.

Introduction

·        The introduction lacks the purpose of the study.

·        In introduction, authors need to highlight more about the unique features of the China case that can contribute significantly to our existing knowledge. Why do people need to know about this?

·        Such studies have already been noticed elsewhere in the standard literature, why re-examining this case is important and what kind of new insights can be revealed about by doing so? These questions need to be addressed carefully.

·        The literature gaps are very shallow or missing. The introduction needs highlighting about the innovative and novelty of the study and the research problem [gap(s)]. I recommend you to add 1-2 new paragraphs and describe the research gap and the research questions. The readers are interested in these elements when they read a scientific paper. You need to provide more clarity about the theoretical contribution of the study and how it differs from previous research on similar topics.

·        Although it is easy to read, the background of the study is still weak. It is not clear the importance of the study either.

·        The introduction part of the study does not include some current and detailed literature review that support the main issue of this paper.

·        You may include the organization of the paper at the end of the introduction section.

literature review

·        Authors need to integrate the results from prior works on this topic in their paper and be specific about how their study contributes to this literature by addressing a particular theoretical or empirical gap.

·        In the literature review and study in general, authors need to employ more current studies on their topic like studies from 2023.

 

 

Methodology and Results

·        I missed the discussion section. In this section, the authors should further expand their work, highlighting the similarities and differences with the existing studies and provide some more critical and insightful arguments on the topic to challenge the current situation and call for further developments.

 

Conclusions and Recommendations

·        The paper may be having some implications, but they need to be clearly established in the conclusion section or other separated section. You may divide the implications into three sections: academic, industry and policymakers.

·        More work needs to be done regarding the limitation and suggestion of future studies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper does a good job of explaining the mechanisms of green finance, measuring their use in China, and constructing an index to show that green finance has increased over time, and that there are regional differences in its use.

The paper's literature review covers some aspects of the effectiveness of green finance, and suggests to the reader that it may have mixed effectiveness. We see that it is used, but it is less clear that it has significant effects on the environment. Thus, while the paper documents the increased use of green finance, it is unclear the degree to which it has led to any environmental improvements. Demonstrating environmental improvements may be beyond the scope of the paper, but it is one of the limitations of the study. We see changes in green finance. We do not see evidence that those investments have improved environmental quality. Although manufacturing is getting greener, this may have occurred without targeted green finance. Perhaps that targeted green finance is going to projects that would have been undertaken without that targeted green finance. From what the paper says, we do not know.

The paper notes regional differences in green finance, but does not discuss regional differences in economic activity. Regions that have higher manufacturing intensity would be expected to have a greater opportunity for green projects. Regions that are more oriented toward commerce might have the opportunity to engage in more green projects, however. One wonders whether the differences in the economic activities in north and south might be responsible for the differences in their green finance activities. The paper makes no mention of regional differences in China's economy.

Still, as a study that examines the growth of targeted green finance, the paper does a good job of demonstrating its claims.

The English is mostly good. The language is convoluted in places and it is obvious that it is not written by a native English speaker. Even so, the paper is easily readable as it stands.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Although there there is room for improvement, the revised version of manuscript may be published.

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for sending the revised manuscript. I have no other comments. All the best.