Research on the Impact of Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation on the Coordinated Development of China’s Water–Energy–Food System from a Spatial Perspective

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript is generally well written within the scope of Sustainability, but there are some issues that need to be addressed. The specific suggestions are as follows:

1.        The reference citations throughout the manuscript need to be adjusted. In the file I have seen, they all display 'Error! Reference source not found’.

2.        The introduction section does not provide a clear explanation of why the Water-Energy-Food System needs to be studied. In other words, although the authors discussed these three aspects, they did not explain why they are considered a system. Additionally, the authors should provide a deeper analysis of how these three sub-systems internally affect each other.

3.        The authors have not given sufficient attention to existing research in the introduction section. It is recommended that the authors read and consider citing the following literature:

•          Du, L., Tian, M., Cheng, J., Chen, W., & Zhao, Z. (2022). Environmental regulation and green energy efficiency: An analysis of the spatial Durbin model from 30 provinces in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(44), 67046-67062.

•          Song, M., Zhao, X., & Shang, Y. (2020). The impact of low carbon city construction on economic efficiency: Empirical evidence from qualitative experiments. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 157, 104777.

•          Chen, D., Lu, X., Hu, W., Zhang, C., & Lin, Y. (2021). How urban spray influences eco-environmental quality: Imperial research in China using the Spatial Durbin model. Ecological Indicators, 131, 108113.

•          Li, Z., Zhou, Y., Li, K., Xiao, H., & Cai, Y. (2021). The spatial effects of city-level water energy nexus: A case study of Hebei Province, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310, 127497.

4.        The authors should explain why they chose the Spatial Durbin model (SDM) instead of other spatial models.

5.        When discussing the results of SDM, the authors did not pay enough attention to the crucial research question and did not delve deeply into the mechanism that led to these results. Based on the comments 4 and 5, I recommend the authors to read and cite these papers if necessary, these papers can show how to perform spatial regression models, particularly the selection of models and in-depth analysis:

•          Song, M., Tao, W., & Shen, Z. (2022). Improving high-quality development with environmental regulation and industrial structure in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 366, 132997.

•          Chen, D., Hu, W., Li, Y., Zhang, C., Lu, X., & Cheng, H. (2023). Exploring the temporary and spatial effects of city size on regional economic integration: Evidence from the Yangtze River Economic Belt in China. Land Use Policy, 132, 106770.

6.        The discussion section is relatively thin, only focusing on the results of the manuscript. It is important to highlight the theoretical and practical contributions of this study. Additionally, the authors should discuss the differences in research methods and results compared to previous studies. These aspects should be strengthened in the discussion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study has novelty, however, cannot publish before addressing the given comments. 

The study mentions the use of a "Coupling Coordination Degree (CCD) model" and a "spatial Durbin model," but it doesn't provide details about these methods. Critical readers would want to know more about the data sources, variables used, and the robustness of the models to better evaluate the validity of the results.

The study covers a broad timeframe from 2003 to 2020. It's important to recognize that the regulatory landscape and the water-energy-food system can change significantly over such a long period. The study doesn't mention how the authors accounted for these changes.

The study points out significant regional differences in coordinated development. However, it doesn't delve into the underlying causes or implications of these variations. Understanding why some regions perform better than others is crucial for policy recommendations.

While the abstract mentions that environmental regulations have a significant positive impact on coordinated development, it doesn't discuss the nature of this impact. It's essential to differentiate between causality and correlation. Do environmental regulations directly cause improvements, or are they simply correlated with other factors driving development?

The study suggests that both formal and informal environmental regulations promote coordinated development by facilitating foreign direct investment and industrial structure upgrading. More information is needed on the mechanisms through which these regulations achieve these outcomes.

The first statement of the introduction must have to update with the given studies [1-3] i.e., Water resources, energy, and food are essential strategic resources for sustaining human survival, promoting socio-economic growth, and maintaining regional sustainable development [1-3]”

[1]  Spatiotemporal Analysis of Meteorological and Hydrological Droughts and Their Propagations

[2] Understanding farmers’ intention and willingness to install renewable energy technology: A solution to reduce the environmental emissions of agriculture

[3] Factor X and the EU: How to make Europe the most resource and energy efficient Economy in the World

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear author(s),

Thank you for the opportunity you gave me to read your manuscript ID sustainability-2637092 titled Research on the Impact of Heterogeneous Environmental Regulation on the Coordinated Development of China's Water-Energy-Food System from a Spatial Perspective submitted to Sustainability.

The current version of the manuscript highlights several concerns need to be resolved.

1-Please, you must highlight the existing gap in literature. It must be clear in the abstract, introduction and theoretical background.

2-what theory is this study supporting? it must be clarified and explained in a section entitled "Theoretical background". I don't agree with including a short scenario in the introduction. Therefore, I suggest you include section 2.Theoretical Background. The manuscript requires this section that clarifies the gap in the literature, the theory that is supporting the study, and the conceptualization of your research. Furthermore, you need to clarify the linkages between the different issues that you discuss in this study.

Try to extend the depth of the literature.

The article here below can assist you to improve the manuscript:

D’Amore, G., Di Vaio, A., Balsalobre-Lorente, D., & Boccia, F. (2022). Artificial intelligence in the water–energy–food model: a holistic approach towards sustainable development goals. Sustainability, 14(2), 867.

3-The methodology needs to be justified. Why was this methodology chosen? why is it better than other methodologies? What methodologies could you have adopted and why were they left out?

4-The discussion of the results needs to be improved. It must be better linked to the theoretical background.

5-What are the implications for the theory? What are the implications for practice? Please provide concrete implications. In the current version they are vague.

6-The manuscript requires professional proofreading to improve the quality of communication

Good luck!

The manuscript needs a professional proofreading

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed all my concerns. I agree the publication of this article. By the way, please remind to adjust the format of this article according to the requirements of this journal. Good luck.

Reviewer 2 Report

No further significant questions.

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Author/s

thank you for your resubmission

The current version of the manuscript is improved meeting all my needs.

Good Luck!