Environmental Regulation, Government-Business Relations, and Corporate Green Innovation: Evidence from Low-Carbon City Pilot Policy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe topic addressed by the Authors is timely and engaging for readers. It can serve as a source of inspiration for both theorists and practitioners and as a starting point for further scientific exploration.
The text is extensive and well-organized, and the Authors present the scientific argument logically.
The title accurately reflects the topic discussed in the text.
The abstract is well-written, comprehensive, and appropriately concise.
The keywords are suitable.
The "Introduction" section raises no objections. The Authors contextualize the topic, specify the objective, and outline the structure of the text.
The Authors conducted a literature review (61 items). No self-citations were found. Over 67% of the cited literature was published between 2020 and 2024.
Based on the literature review, the Authors formulated four research hypotheses.
The empirical section is clear and thoroughly documented.
The "Conclusion and Implications" section is well-written, although it should be supplemented with the limitations of the research conducted and suggested directions for future research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. The article addresses the relevant issue of the impact of environmental regulations on corporate innovation in China, specifically through the Low-Carbon City Pilot (LCCP) initiative. The question is interesting and timely for contemporary research on sustainable development and environmental innovation.
2. The findings highlight the important role of regulations and the interaction between government and businesses in supporting "green" technologies. The study also examines the influence of corruption on environmental initiatives, which contributes valuable insights to the existing knowledge.
3. To address endogeneity, instrumental variables (IV) methods or two-stage least squares regression (2SLS) can be used.
4. The use of spatial-temporal models or the inclusion of dummy variables for each region and time period in the analysis would help account for differences in the level of development across regions.
5. Although the study touches upon both short-term and long-term effects, to gain a deeper understanding of the long-term consequences of environmental regulations, I suggest extending the analysis over a longer time horizon. However, this is at the authors' discretion.
6. The study demonstrates the impact of corruption on the effectiveness of environmental regulations. Therefore, there is a need for further research to investigate how these processes develop and what measures can reduce corruption.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1）This study involves multiple variables and it is recommended that a theoretical model diagram be presented to clearly show the relationship between the variables.
2）This article is poorly formatted when citing scholars' perspectives in the text,the year should be added to the author's name,such as Zheng et al.，2024.
3）The abstract indicates that the main content of this study not only explores the impact of LCCP on corporate green innovation, but also explores the relationship between corporate green innovation and corporate sustainability under the influence of LCCP, but the author has not combed through the literature related to corporate sustainability in the introduction part, and the rest of the article also discusses less about corporate sustainability, which needs to be further supplemented.
4）The authors should strengthen the construction of the theoretical system and define the concepts of the variables involved in the “Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses”.
5）In the heterogeneous effects analysis,it is advised to differentiate between firm size or type of business.
6）It is recommended that the conclusions be further refined, and that the conclusions be closely aligned with the assumptions made in the previous section, specifying whether or not the assumptions made are valid.
7）It is a bit abrupt to put forward policy recommendations directly after the conclusion, and a discussion can be added in the middle of the two parts, in which the findings and contributions of this study are again elaborated in the light of existing scholars' studies.
8）One of the research contents of this paper is how to promote green innovation and sustainable development of enterprises, and at the end of the paper, in addition to giving policy recommendations, it can also provide suggestions with enterprises on how to fully utilize their own resources to achieve green innovation in the LCCP policy environment.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author has completed the revision. The manuscript has met the publication requirements.
