Environmental Regulations, Green Technological Innovation, and Green Economy: Evidence from China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript investigates the impact of environmental regulations and corporate green technological innovation on the green economy in China. Utilizing fixed effects models, mediation models, spatial models, and regression analysis, the study concludes that environmental regulations directly and indirectly enhance the green economy through corporate green technological innovation. I have several questions for the authors:

1. In the abstract, the sentence "We hope to explore how the environmental regulations affect the green economy through the corporate green innovation. Thus, the research aims to enhance our understanding of this affect process" is somewhat unclear. Please clarify what you mean by "affect process" and consider revising this for better readability. 

2. Page 3, Lines 141-166: The section discussing the relationship between environmental regulations and the green economy seems repetitive in places. Please streamline this section to avoid redundancy and improve the flow of the review.

3. Page 12, Lines 419-435: In the research design, you describe the green economy (GE) variable but do not provide much context on why specific indicators were chosen. Please elaborate on the rationale behind selecting these indicators for evaluating the green economy.

4. Page 12, Lines 523-533: You mention constructing several regression models but do not always provide a clear justification for the choice of these specific models.Please explain why these models were chosen over other potential models and the benefits they offer?

5. Page 16, Lines 637-647: In the spatial spillover effect analysis, more context about the geographic regions studied would be helpful. Please provide additional details about the specific regions within China that were included in the study and how they were selected?6. Page 18, Lines 759-766: While you discuss regional differences and provide some recommendations, could you offer more specific policy recommendations tailored to each region's unique circumstances? For example, what particular strategies should the Western region focus on compared to the Eastern region to enhance their green economy development?

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article reviewed is very important and interesting. It is worth publishing after considering four suggestions for its merits and editorial improvement.

1. The reviewed article does not include the formulas used (pp. 11-12). They must be supplemented.

2. The authors perform multi-step calculations using several statistical and econometric tools to verify the three research hypotheses. For this reason, it is useful to present the links between the hypotheses, research methods, research tools, and the resulting conclusions. I'd like to propose in the introduction that the conceptual framework of the entire article be constructed on a single diagram.

3. The implications (p.19-20) are very interestingly presented. In general, these implications take the form of widely acknowledged demands in the world that are worth fulfilling for developing the green economy. Thus, one can agree with them without knowing the research results and conclusions of the reviewed article. I propose to link these implications directly to the conclusions. To this end, I propose making a diagram showing these links.

4. The reviewed article needs minor language and editorial corrections:

There is no space between China and The study ... “China.The study ...” (p.1, line 27)

There is no (a) before Economic growth. (p.9, line 436)

Formula (1) is not given (p.11, line 486) after the sentence “The specific method is outlined as follows: (p.11, line 484-485). Please provide this missing formula.

None of the four formulas are provided (p.12). Please provide these missing formulas.

Formula (1) is on page 11, and formula (1) is on page 12. Please correct the numeration of the formulas.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The reviewed article needs minor language and editorial corrections:

There is no space between China and The study ... “China.The study ...” (p.1, line 27)

There is no (a) before Economic growth. (p.9, line 436)

Formula (1) is not given (p.11, line 486) after the sentence “The specific method is outlined as follows: (p.11, line 484-485). Please provide this missing formula.

None of the four formulas are provided (p.12). Please provide these missing formulas.

Formula (1) is on page 11, and formula (1) is on page 12. Please correct the numeration of the formulas.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper investigates the impact of the environmental regulations and the corporate green technological innovation on the green economy. Some comments are as follows.

(1)It seems that there is no research significance to investigate  the impact of the environmental regulations and the corporate green technological innovation on the green economy

(2) The endogeneity issues should be considered in the paper.

(3) The output time of the corporate green technological innovation should be considered in the paper.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First, I would like to congratulate the authors for their equally scientific and responsible approach to the model of the ecological economy and the impact of macro- and microeconomic regulations on the green economy through corporate green innovation.

We appreciate that the paper is well structured and follows a logical research flow based on a detailed analysis of the literature. The authors identify the existing gaps in the theoretical approach and, using fixed effects models, mediation models, spatial models and regression analyses, manage to highlight the fact that environmental regulations can directly influence the green economy.

We note as positive aspects, the importance of the research and the detailed manner of approach, based on the demonstration of three hypotheses, considered relevant by the authors, and circumscribed to a logical theoretical model, graphically represented by fig. 1.

The research methodology is appropriate and correctly used in arguing the research hypotheses.

We agree that although the paper is well grounded and highlights in an original way the direct relationships between the three variables, environmental regulations, ecological technological innovation and the green economy, the research limits identified by the authors call for new directions of approach and we appreciate that these are mentioned and assumed by the authors

We consider that the article has scientific value, but we recommend the authors to check the formal aspect. For example, table no. 1 must be corrected so that it respects the journal's quality requirements. However, barring such formal corrections, the paper qualifies for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript can be accepted. 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer #1

Point 1: This manuscript can be accepted. 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your recognition, which makes me feel extremely gratified and encouraged. Your affirmation is the motivation for me to continue my efforts and further study.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, we appreciate the respected Reviewer’s constructive suggestions for our paper that really help a lot for the improvement. We sincerely welcome your further comments.

With our best wishes!

Tiansen Liu

20/6/2024

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I keep my first review comments.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc