A Research Paradigm for Industrial Spatial Layout Optimization and High-Quality Development in The Context of Carbon Peaking
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Modifications completed
Recommended for publication
Author Response
Dear Reviewers
We sincerely appreciate your helpful suggestions to improve our paper. First of all, thank you very much for your valuable comments. In light of your comments, we have carefully revised the entire text using a revision mode for your convenience. The main changes are provided here; you can see the full text for other changes. The following changes are made to address the issues you raised.
Reviewer 1
Modifications completed
Recommended for publication
Reply: Thank you very much for your recommendation. we will continue working on it.
We hope the revised manuscript is satisfactory now. Once again, thank you for your help with processing our paper.
Best wishes,
The authors: Yang Zhang, Wenlong Li, Jiawen Sun*, Haidong Zhao*, and Haiying Lin
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
This is a research manuscript with research significance and innovation, but it still does not meet the publishing requirements. The following issues need to be revised.
1. There are still some errors in the parameter interpretation of the full text equation, which needs careful examination and revision by the author.
2. It is necessary to invite professionals or native speakers to polish the full text.
3. At the end of the literature review, it is suggested to more specifically mention the shortcomings of existing research, and propose the innovation and contribution of this research.
4. The format of references needs to be checked and unified.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer （sustainability-2152585）
Dear Reviewers
We sincerely appreciate your helpful suggestions to improve our paper. First of all, thank you very much for your valuable comments. In light of your comments, we have carefully revised the entire text using a revision mode for your convenience. The main changes are provided here; you can see the full text for other changes. The following changes are made to address the issues you raised.
Reviewer 2
- There are still some errors in the parameter interpretation of the full text equation, which needs careful examination and revision by the author.
Reply: Thank you very much for your correction. We have carefully checked and revised the equation parameters in the text.
- It is necessary to invite professionals or native speakers to polish the full text.
Reply: Thanks to your comments, we have asked the MDPI Billing Team to touch up the full text.
- At the end of the literature review, it is suggested to more specifically mention the shortcomings of existing research, and propose the innovation and contribution of this research.
Reply: Your comments are much appreciated, and we have written more specifically on the gaps in existing research and the innovations in this paper at the end of the literature review. The specific changes to the article can be found in lines 187-234 of the text.
- The format of references needs to be checked and unified.
Reply: Thanks to your correction, we have rechecked and revised the references.
We hope the revised manuscript is satisfactory now. Once again, thank you for your help with processing our paper.
Best wishes,
The authors: Yang Zhang, Wenlong Li, Jiawen Sun*, Haidong Zhao*, and Haiying Lin
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
Dear Authors,
I have read your article with a big interest as the balancing of ecology and economy (performace) belongs to the up-to-date issue. Bellow you will find my suggestions:
The similar topic regarding industry concentration and the impact of companies on the regional development has been researched by Chmelíková. (see e.g. Chmelíková, G., Redlichova, R. (2013). Start-ups and their role in the economy; Chmelíková, G. , Blazkova, I. (2015) The Impact of Import Competition on the Development of Market Concentration in the Czech Food and Beverages Industry)
line 105/106: non-ended sentence: "...which provides a basis for"
line 220: in what units are the outputs measured? In value added as mentioned in section 3.4? If so, could you mentioned it here to be more clear for reader?
Why there is "-1" in formula? In this case if the growth of the region is higher compared to state, DAI is lower than 1 and that means what? Would it be possible to explain the meaning of result of DAI rather than numerator and denominator? (In the same way as RCC.)
line 237: in the formula is "CLP", while in the explanation you use "CPOR" (line 238).
line 395: probably should be comma, not dot here: "..2017. due..."
In tables 2 and 3 I would recommend to highlight the different situations in different colors to help the reader to better orientation in the results.
section 6.2: Could you state more concrete actions the goverment should take to encourage the industry layout suggested by you? Maybe you could make a section of "governmental actions" and to each action you could state what would be the intended aim / result.
I wish you very best in your futher research.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer （sustainability-2152585）
Dear Reviewers
We sincerely appreciate your helpful suggestions to improve our paper. First of all, thank you very much for your valuable comments. In light of your comments, we have carefully revised the entire text using a revision mode for your convenience. The main changes are provided here; you can see the full text for other changes. The following changes are made to address the issues you raised.
Reviewer 3
- The similar topic regarding industry concentration and the impact of companies on the regional development has been researched by Chmelíková. (see e.g. Chmelíková, G., Redlichova, R. (2013). Start-ups and their role in the economy; Chmelíková, G. , Blazkova, I. (2015) The Impact of Import Competition on the Development of Market Concentration in the Czech Food and Beverages Industry)
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion, the research of Chmelíková has been reviewed and cited in the literature review section. See lines 178-179 of the article.
- line 105/106: non-ended sentence: "...which provides a basis for"
Reply: Thanks to your correction, the sentences in lines 105-106 have been re-translated and retouched. See lines 113-116 for the revised content.
- line 220: in what units are the outputs measured? In value added as mentioned in section 3.4? If so, could you mentioned it here to be more clear for reader?
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. Output is measured in terms of value added in this paper and changed to value added in the revision process. See lines 242-280 for the specific part of the revision.
- Why there is "-1" in formula? In this case if the growth of the region is higher compared to state, DAI is lower than 1 and that means what? Would it be possible to explain the meaning of result of DAI rather than numerator and denominator? (In the same way as RCC.)
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion.For responses, please see the PDF file.
- Line 237: in the formula is "CLP", while in the explanation you use "CPOR" (line 238).
Reply: Thank you for your correction. This mistake in our formulae has been corrected and explained in full using the over CLP.
- line 395: probably should be comma, not dot here: "..2017. due..."
Reply: Thank you for the correction. The dot has been changed to a comma.
- In tables 2 and 3 I would recommend to highlight the different situations in different colors to help the reader to better orientation in the results.
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. To help the reader better orientate themselves, we have modified Tables 2 and 3 by using different colors to indicate different situations.
- section 6.2: Could you state more concrete actions the goverment should take to encourage the industry layout suggested by you? Maybe you could make a section of "governmental actions" and to each action you could state what would be the intended aim / result.
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestions. In light of your requests, the section on policy recommendations has been removed, and a team on governmental actions has been added to support the optimization of the regional industrial layout through more concrete governmental actions to achieve high-quality development. See 6.2 Governmental actions for the revised section.
We hope the revised manuscript is satisfactory now. Once again, thank you for your help with processing our paper.
Best wishes,
The authors: Yang Zhang, Wenlong Li, Jiawen Sun*, Haidong Zhao*, and Haiying Lin
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
Dear authors,
congratulation for your excellent work. I recommend your paper after revison:
- please put the map (geographical location) of provinces in introduction or explain better the sentences in line 58 and 59...some provinces in the eastern region hope to transfer industries to the central and western regions...
- line 60 ...has launched a series of supporting policies...explain better, which one?
- line 114 explain better positive and negative effects on regional economic development
- expand with more sources references list
Author Response
Response to Reviewer （sustainability-2152585）
Dear Reviewers
We sincerely appreciate your helpful suggestions to improve our paper. First of all, thank you very much for your valuable comments. In light of your comments, we have carefully revised the entire text using a revision mode for your convenience. The main changes are provided here; you can see the full text for other changes. The following changes are made to address the issues you raised.
Reviewer 4
- please put the map (geographical location) of provinces in introduction or explain better the sentences in line 58 and 59...some provinces in the eastern region hope to transfer industries to the central and western regions...
Reply: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have added Study area to the introduction. And the further explanation of the sentence in lines 58-59, see lines 71-73 for the revised section.
- line 60 ...has launched a series of supporting policies...explain better, which one?
Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. During the revision process, the relevant policies to support industrial transfer have been further explained, and specific policy names have been written out. See lines 68-71 for the amendments.
- line 114 explain better positive and negative effects on regional economic development
Reply: Thanks to your suggestions, we have further explained industrial relocation's positive and negative regional effects and added relevant references. See lines 125-137 for the revised section.
- expand with more sources references list
Reply: Thanks to your suggestions, we have expanded the list of references during the revision process.
We hope the revised manuscript is satisfactory now. Once again, thank you for your help with processing our paper.
Best wishes,
The authors: Yang Zhang, Wenlong Li, Jiawen Sun*, Haidong Zhao*, and Haiying Lin
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is relevant for the journal. However, in order to be published, it needs some innovation in structuring. For example, the paper shows a sound methodology on the proposed mapping, applicable independently of the case study. Hence, the case study should have less weight in the title and in the abstract, and the innovative methodology should be emphasized.
The presented methodology is rather sophisticated from the statistical point of view but has some serious flaws in the conceptual layer.
The review of previous research is very short, limited to Chinese studies, and has a form of a mechanistic and technical review only mentioning previous research rather than analysing their results and identifying the research gap
The Great Bend of the Yellow River was chosen as a case to conduct empirical research that which industries are suitable for carbon peaking ? Why?
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper investigates the context of carbon peaking and from the angle of carbon peaking and from the angle of industrial transfer, this paper focuses on the four provincial administrative regions (provinces) in the Great Bend of the Yellow River (the Bend), analyzes the agglomeration, competitive edge, and low-carbon competitiveness of industries in the Bend.
While the paper attempts to answer an important, I have some concerns about this paper.
1. The graphs used in this article to show the results are not clear enough and less readable.
2. This article only calculates the situation of industrial agglomeration, and does not further discuss the reasons for industrial agglomeration.
3. This article does not ask a clear scientific question, but only measures the correlation index.
4. The data sources are not clearly described, and a detailed explanation of the relevant variables used .
5. This paper does not further explain the optimization of the spatial layout of industries in the Great Bend of the Yellow River.
6. This paper lacks the discussion on mechanism, which can deepen the understanding of the conclusion. Some key arguments lack evidence. For example, “The paper analysis on the transfer-out trend is the most apparent in Ningxia, where the industrial agglomeration index dropped form 2.22 in 2012 to 0.19 in 2017. However, no further explanation is given for the calculated industrial index. ”
Reviewer 3 Report
The value of the article in the context of the conducted Heterogeneity Analysis and Spatial Layout Optimization is evaluated on the good level . The subject is fully relevant.
Please specify:
1) the empirical purpose of the article. He is currently dispersed;
2) no bibliographic references, e.g. to European and American literature.
Comparing other good practices will strengthen the international value of the article.
