Assessing the Impact of Green Energy Transition, Technological Innovation, and Natural Resources on Load Capacity Factor in Algeria: Evidence from Dynamic Autoregressive Distributed Lag Simulations and Machine Learning Validation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study investigates Algeria’s environmental sustainability by analyzing the impact of total natural resource rents (TNRR), green energy transition (ETI), technological innovation (TI), urbanization, and GDP on load capacity factor (LCF). Findings indicate that resource reliance weakens sustainability, while energy transition and innovation have mixed effects. Policy recommendations include economic diversification, green technology incentives, and institutional reforms to strengthen environmental governance and ensure a more resilient, sustainable future.  

 

The following weaknesses needs to be addressed: 

 

The analysis focuses solely on Algeria, a country with a distinct economic structure and heavy reliance on natural resource rents. The findings may not be generalizable to other economies with different institutional and environmental frameworks. A comparative study involving multiple nations could provide broader insights.  

In relation to the previous point, and to the point of contribution to the relevant literature, my suggestion would be to read the work of Benjamin Schuetze (Freiburg University) discussing the energy transition in Jordan: Schuetze, B., et al. (2023). The geopolitical economy of an undermined energy transition: The case of Jordan. Energy Policy, 180, 113655. This is useful to contextualise also the case of Algeria in a broader regional energy transition dynamics. 

 

The study primarily considers TNRR, ETI, TI, GDP, and urbanization as key sustainability drivers. However, several other crucial factors, such as government policies, climate variability, advancements in renewable energy, human capital development, and evolving demographic trends, are not sufficiently integrated. Future research should adopt a more comprehensive approach.  

 

The study finds that technological innovation has a negative short-term effect on LCF due to adaptation costs, infrastructural adjustments, and skill shortages. This contradicts the conventional belief that technology inherently fosters sustainability. Further exploration is needed to determine how to mitigate these transitional inefficiencies.  

 

– While ETI is expected to enhance sustainability, the study finds its short-term impact negative, with an insignificant long-term effect. This unexpected result warrants deeper examination of renewable energy policies, infrastructure readiness, and economic incentives.  

 

The study does not account for regional disparities within Algeria. Analyzing how green energy transitions, resource management, and urbanization vary across different regions could offer a more nuanced understanding.  

 

The study covers data from 1980 to 2024 but does not project long-term future sustainability trends. Extending the research period and incorporating predictive modeling could strengthen its policy relevance.  

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Comments 1: The analysis focuses solely on Algeria, a country with a distinct economic structure and heavy reliance on natural resource rents. The findings may not be generalizable to other economies with different institutional and environmental frameworks. A comparative study involving multiple nations could provide broader insights.

Response 1: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful observation regarding the country-specific focus of our study. While the unique socioeconomic and institutional context of Algeria limits direct generalizability, our findings provide critical foundational insights into resource-dependent economies undergoing green transitions. We acknowledge the value of comparative studies and have added a dedicated subsection in the Limitations and Future Research Directions (Section 5.3) proposing cross-national analyses, particularly across MENA and African nations, to explore how institutional frameworks and resource dependencies shape sustainability outcomes.

Comments 2: In relation to the previous point, and to the point of contribution to the relevant literature, my suggestion would be to read the work of Benjamin Schuetze (Freiburg University) discussing the energy transition in Jordan: Schuetze, B., et al. (2023). The geopolitical economy of an undermined energy transition: The case of Jordan. Energy Policy, 180, 113655. This is useful to contextualize also the case of Algeria in a broader regional energy transition dynamic.

Response 2:  We sincerely thank the reviewer for recommending Schuetze et al.’s (2023) work on Jordan’s energy transition. This reference has been integrated into the revised Literature Review (Section 2.2) to contextualize Algeria’s renewable energy policies within broader regional dynamics. Specifically, we contrast Algeria’s state-led, hydrocarbon-subsidized transition with Jordan’s decentralized, donor-driven approach, emphasizing how geopolitical economies influence renewable adoption. This comparison strengthens our discussion of Algeria’s hydrogen strategy and solar investments (Section 1) by highlighting regional disparities in governance and financing..

Comments 3: The study primarily considers TNRR, ETI, TI, GDP, and urbanization as key sustainability drivers. However, several other crucial factors, such as government policies, climate variability, advancements in renewable energy, human capital development, and evolving demographic trends, are not sufficiently integrated. Future research should adopt a more comprehensive approach.

Response 3:   We agree that additional factors like climate variability and human capital are critical to sustainability. While our model prioritized variables directly tied to energy transition and resource dependency (e.g., TNRR, ETI), we have expanded Section 5.3 to explicitly outline omitted factors. Future research directions now include analyzing climate resilience policies (e.g., drought adaptation) and demographic shifts (e.g., youth workforce trends), which could refine the interplay between innovation and environmental outcomes.

Comments 4: The study finds that technological innovation has a negative short-term effect on LCF due to adaptation costs, infrastructural adjustments, and skill shortages. This contradicts the conventional belief that technology inherently fosters sustainability. Further exploration is needed to determine how to mitigate these transitional inefficiencies.

Response 4: We thank the reviewer for this insightful comment regarding the paradoxical short-term negative impact of technological innovation (TI) on the Load Capacity Factor (LCF). We acknowledge that TI, as measured in our study, encompasses both "dirty" and "green" technologies. As outlined by Acemoglu et al. (2012), dirty technologies exacerbate environmental burdens and pollution, whereas green technologies aim to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions (León et al., 2017). Our aggregated TI indicator reflects this dual categorization, which may partly explain the observed negative short-term effect on LCF. In the short run, adaptation costs, infrastructural adjustments, and skill shortages—often associated with the integration of both types of technologies—can lead to transitional inefficiencies that temporarily worsen environmental outcomes. (See section 4.3)

Comments 5: – While ETI is expected to enhance sustainability, the study finds its short-term impact negative, with an insignificant long-term effect. This unexpected result warrants deeper examination of renewable energy policies, infrastructure readiness, and economic incentives.

Response 5:   The unexpected ETI results likely reflect Algeria’s delayed renewable integration relative to its fossil fuel infrastructure. In the revised Policy Implications (Section 5.2), we link this to structural barriers like subsidy dependence (e.g., Müller et al., 2024’s critique of Algeria’s hydrogen strategy). We also recommend further analysis of grid modernization and fiscal incentives to accelerate ETI’s long-term benefits, addressing the reviewer’s call for deeper policy examination.

Comments 6: The study does not account for regional disparities within Algeria. Analyzing how green energy transitions, resource management, and urbanization vary across different regions could offer a more nuanced understanding.

Response 6:  We thank the reviewer for highlighting this gap. While regional disparities fall outside the scope of our national-level analysis, we have added a subsection in Future Research Directions (Section 5.3) advocating for spatial econometric models or subnational case studies (e.g., solar potential in southern Algeria vs. industrial hubs in the north) to capture intra-country heterogeneity in energy transitions and urbanization impacts.

Comments 7: The study covers data from 1980 to 2024 but does not project long-term future sustainability trends. Extending the research period and incorporating predictive modeling could strengthen its policy relevance.

Response 7:  We thank the reviewer for this important observation. We acknowledge that while our study spans a robust historical period (1980–2024), it does not extend its analysis to project long-term sustainability trends. This limitation has now been explicitly noted in the revised "Limitations and Future Research Directions" section. Specifically, we state: "This study offers critical insights into Algeria’s environmental sustainability challenges but is subject to several limitations. While our analysis captures key drivers of Algeria’s Load Capacity Factor over the period 1980–2024, it does not project future sustainability trends beyond this timeframe. This limits its capacity to inform forward-looking policies aimed at mitigating long-term ecological risks or optimizing energy transition pathways." In addition, we have expanded the discussion on future research to address this gap. We propose that subsequent studies extend the research period and incorporate advanced predictive modeling techniques—such as scenario-based simulations and machine learning forecasts—to capture long-term dynamics. For example, coupling our Dynamic ARDL (DARDL) simulations with integrated climate-economy models like GCAM or TIAM-ECN could enable projections under varying energy transition pathways (e.g., accelerated renewables adoption versus prolonged fossil fuel dependence) extending to 2050–2100. Furthermore, integrating climate adaptation metrics (such as desertification rates or water scarcity indices) into these models could clarify how environmental stressors interact with policy choices to shape Algeria’s ecological resilience over the long term.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study investigated the effects of total natural resource rent (TNRR), energy transition (ETI), technological innovation (TI), gross domestic product (GDP), primary energy consumption (PEC), and urbanization (URB) on Algeria's load capacity coefficient (LCF) from 1980 to 2023. This analysis utilizes ARDL and Dahl econometric techniques to capture both short-term and long-term impacts, while taking into account asymmetric dynamics. There are certain typical cases that have reference significance for empirical research in economics, and some suggestions are provided for the authors to refer to.

1. From the title at the beginning of the article, author information specifications, citation format in the main text, specifications for figures and tables, to the specifications for the reference section at the end, authors need to further modify and standardize to meet the formatting requirements of the journal.

2. In the introduction of the first chapter, it is necessary to include more introductions to the particularity and typicality of using Algeria as a typical case study, as well as the need to draw on and cite relevant national policies, industry reports, and authoritative scholars' research. Starting from the first chapter, a large number of relevant studies should be introduced to support the rationality and necessity of this research.

3. In the literature review section, the authors began to propose relevant hypotheses, which felt a bit sudden. They had not yet conducted a thorough review of the literature and analysis of academic gaps, and cited authoritative journals and relevant research suggestions for further increase.

4. In terms of data sources, it is recommended that authors clarify the sources of the data, especially the specific explanations of GFN and WDI.

5. The font size of the policy proposal title is relatively large. Whether it should be combined with the conclusion section of Chapter 5 or a separate chapter requires the authors to think and distinguish. How to integrate and differentiate the conclusion and discussion sections, so that experts and readers can have a clearer understanding of the authors' research findings and further thinking.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There is still room for further improvement and revision in the English expression of the article, and it is believed that there will be improvements during the process of article revision.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Comment 1: From the title at the beginning of the article, author information specifications, citation format in the main text, specifications for figures and tables, to the specifications for the reference section at the end, authors need to further modify and standardize to meet the formatting requirements of the journal.

Response 1: We sincerely appreciate the reviewer’s attention to formatting consistency. We have carefully reviewed the journal’s guidelines and standardized all elements, including the title page, author information, citation formatting, figures/tables (e.g., Figure 1, Table 1), and reference section. Adjustments to font sizes, headings, and alignment have been made to ensure full compliance with the journal’s specifications..

Comment 2: In the introduction of the first chapter, it is necessary to include more introductions to the particularity and typicality of using Algeria as a typical case study, as well as the need to draw on and cite relevant national policies, industry reports, and authoritative scholars' research. Starting from the first chapter, a large number of relevant studies should be introduced to support the rationality and necessity of this research.

Response 2: Thank you for highlighting this gap. In the revised Introduction, we expanded discussions on Algeria’s unique context by emphasizing:

• Its status as Africa’s largest nation with diverse climatic and economic conditions (Section 1).
• Specific national policies, such as the $3 billion renewable energy program (Section 1) and the 2035 hydrogen strategy (Müller et al., 2024).
• References to Algeria’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement (Bergougui, 2024a) and the SDG Index ranking (Uche & Ngepah, 2024).
• We further integrated citations from the World Bank (WDI, 2024) and GFN (2024) to strengthen the rationale for Algeria’s selection as a critical case study.

Comment 3: In the literature review section, the authors began to propose relevant hypotheses, which felt a bit sudden. They had not yet conducted a thorough review of the literature and analysis of academic gaps, and cited authoritative journals and relevant research suggestions for further increase.

Response 3: We acknowledge the abrupt introduction of hypotheses in the original draft. In the revised Literature Review (Section 2), we restructured each subsection (TI–LCF, ET–LCF, TNRR–LCF) to systematically:

• Summarize gaps in existing studies (e.g., geographical bias toward G7/BRICS).
• Highlight Algeria’s underexplored dynamics (e.g., reliance on hydrocarbons, nascent renewable transition).
• Derive hypotheses (H1–H3) as logical conclusions from these gaps.
• This clarifies how the hypotheses address unresolved questions in the literature, ensuring a smoother transition from review to hypothesis formulation.

Comment 4: In terms of data sources, it is recommended that authors clarify the sources of the data, especially the specific explanations of GFN and WDI.

Response 4: We have clarified data sources in Section 3.1 and Table 1:

• GFN (Global Footprint Network): Primary source for LCF, biocapacity, and ecological footprint data.
• WDI (World Development Indicators): Source for TNRR, TI, GDP, URB, and other macroeconomic variables.

Comment 5: The font size of the policy proposal title is relatively large. Whether it should be combined with the conclusion section of Chapter 5 or a separate chapter requires the authors to think and distinguish. How to integrate and differentiate the conclusion and discussion sections, so that experts and readers can have a clearer understanding of the authors' research findings and further thinking.

Response 5: We thank the reviewer for this observation. The “Policy Implications” subsection (Section 5.1) has been reformatted to align with the journal’s style guide:

• Font size adjusted to match body text.
• Content streamlined to avoid redundancy with the Conclusion (Section 5), focusing instead on actionable recommendations (e.g., sovereign wealth funds, green technology incentives).
• A new paragraph now bridges the Conclusion and Policy Implications, emphasizing how findings inform practical strategies (e.g., diversification, energy efficiency standards).

 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Looks good now 

Author Response

We grateful for your support and for accepting the final version.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The quality of the paper has been improved after the last revision, but there are still some problems in the format or content that have not changed. One or two sentences about the purpose and origin of the research can be mentioned appropriately. In the author information, the author's name does not correspond to the corresponding unit according to the numerical serial number, and the author information and unit information are still somewhat inconsistent with the requirements of the journal. Also, this journal doesn't seem to require High Lights to be attached to the abstract, and there is a format for reference in the main body of the article, which seems to appear in a way similar to digital labeling, such as ... [1], ... [2-4] and so on. The format of the references at the bottom of the article is also different from the requirements of the journal. At last, chapter 5 is the conclusion of the research, without the labels of chapters 5.1 and 5.2. At present, the part of policy suggestions is parallel to the title of the conclusion of the research. It is suggested that the author consult the format of other articles in this journal to discuss and think about the conclusion of the research. The presentation of tables and the format of some formulas in the article also need further adjustment and confirmation.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English expression has made some progress, and now it is necessary to further standardize the content and format of the article.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

The quality of the paper has been improved after the last revision, but there are still some problems in the format or content that have not changed. 

Comment 1 One or two sentences about the purpose and origin of the research can be mentioned appropriately.

Response:
Thank you for your helpful suggestion. We have added one or two sentences detailing the purpose and origin of the research in both the abstract and the introduction (please see the lines highlighted in green).

Comment 2 In the author information, the author's name does not correspond to the corresponding unit according to the numerical serial number, and the author information and unit information are still somewhat inconsistent with the requirements of the journal. 

Response:
Thank you for pointing out the inconsistencies. We have revised the author’s information so that each author's name correctly corresponds to the appropriate numerical serial number and institutional affiliation. Additionally, we have reformatted the author and unit details to fully comply with the journal’s guidelines. Please refer to the updated version for verification.

Comment 3 Also, this journal doesn't seem to require High Lights to be attached to the abstract, and there is a format for reference in the main body of the article, which seems to appear in a way similar to digital labeling, such as ... [1], ... [2-4] and so on. The format of the references at the bottom of the article is also different from the requirements of the journal. 

Response:
Thank you for your valuable comments. We have reviewed the journal’s guidelines and made the following revisions:

1. Highlights: We have removed the Highlights section from the abstract, as it is not required by the journal.
2. In-text References: We have reviewed the journal's formatting guidelines for references, which specify that references should be numbered in order of appearance and indicated using numerals in square brackets (e.g., [1] or [2,3], or [4–6]). Accordingly, we have implemented this numeral in square brackets in our revised version.

Comment 4 At last, chapter 5 is the conclusion of the research, without the labels of chapters 5.1 and 5.2. At present, the part of policy suggestions is parallel to the title of the conclusion of the research. It is suggested that the author consult the format of other articles in this journal to discuss and think about the conclusion of the research. 

Response:
Thank you for your insightful suggestion. We have revised Chapter 5 to ensure that the policy suggestions section is properly structured within the conclusion. We have also reviewed the formatting of similar articles in the journal and adjusted the section headings accordingly to align with the journal's style.

Comment 5 The presentation of tables and the format of some formulas in the article also need further adjustment and confirmation.

Response:
Thank you for your comment. Since the journal requires a specific table format, we applied it consistently throughout the revised manuscript. Additionally, we have reviewed and adjusted the formatting of formulas to ensure they align with the journal’s guidelines.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx