The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment and Environmental Regulation on Urban Sustainable Competitiveness: Evidence from Chinese Cities
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript investigates the relationship between foreign direct investment (FDI) and urban sustainable competitiveness (USC) in China, considering the moderating role of environmental regulations. While the topic is relevant, the paper suffers from some concerns.
1. In Section 2, the literature review lacks depth and a clear connection to the research gap. It needs to provide a more comprehensive and critical analysis of existing studies on FDI, USC, and environmental regulations, highlighting the specific research gap being addressed.
2. Additionally, the discussion of the negative impacts of FDI is not well-connected to the research hypotheses.
3. The methodology section is not adequately described. The choice of the USC index from the 'Annual Report on China's Urban Competitiveness' needs more justification. Are there any potential biases in this index?
4. The construction of the environmental regulation variable is not clear. Please provide a more detailed explanation.
5. The justification for the inverted-U shaped relationship is not convincing. The scatter plot analysis is insufficient to determine the appropriate model type. More rigorous statistical tests and a deeper discussion of the theoretical underpinnings of the non-linear relationship are needed.
6. The discussion of the baseline regression results is insufficiently detailed. Please provide a more in-depth analysis and interpretation of the findings.
7. The tables are not well-organized, and the discussion of the findings is insufficiently detailed.
8. The robustness test is not adequately explained. Please clarify the rationale behind each method and discuss the implications of the findings.
9. The endogeneity test is not well-explained. Please provide more details on the choice of instrumental variables and the interpretation of the results.
10. The discussion of regional heterogeneity is superficial, providing no meaningful insights into the reasons behind the observed differences between regions.
11. The results do not fully support the conclusions and contain some speculative statements. The study's limitations are not adequately addressed, please discuss the potential limitations of the data and methodology in more detail.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study explores the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on urban sustainable competitiveness (USC) and its relationship with environmental regulation. It finds an inverted U-shaped relationship, with FDI boosting USC up to a threshold, and environmental regulation moderates this relationship. Lax regulation enhances FDI's positive effects more effectively than strict policies. The findings suggest that implementing balanced environmental regulations can optimize FDI's contributions and strengthen USC.
The manuscript is well-structured, clear, and relevant to the field.
The references are pertinent and mainly consist of recent publications. The tables are suitable, and the data is presented clearly.
The manuscript's results are reproducible based on the details provided in the paper.
The conclusions are consistent with the evidence and the arguments presented.
However, I have a specific comment.
The title should be more specific; add the location of the analysis (China) to provide a more explicit focus for the study. This adjustment would make it easier for readers to grasp the main focus of the research and its relevance to a specific geographical area.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis article, titled "Environmental Regulation, Foreign Direct Investment and Urban Sustainable Competitiveness", investigates the relationship between foreign direct investment (FDI) and urban sustainable competitiveness (USC) and the role of environmental regulation in this context. Overall, the article is well structured and provides valuable insights into the relationship between FDI, environmental regulation and USC. However, I do have some suggestions for improvement.
Suggestions for improvement:
- Abstract:
The abstract: mentions that there is an “inverted U-shaped relationship” between the impact of FDI on USC, but it does not specify the exact value of the threshold point and its practical significance. It is suggested to add the range of thresholds (e.g., through the inflection point values in the empirical results) in the summary or conclusion part, and explain its policy implications.
- Introduction
In the introduction section, it is mentioned that data from 282 cities are used, but in both the data sources and conclusion sections, it is written as 281 cities, so the authors are requested to double-check, verify and standardize their statements.
- Endogeneity test:
The endogeneity test uses lagged variables as instrumental variables, but the choice of these instruments is not fully justified. The existing instrumental variables (lagged FDI and squared terms) may suffer from serial correlation (e.g., FDI path dependence) and insufficient exogeneity (lagged terms may affect the current USC through unobserved factors). It is recommended to replace the instrumental variables, such as the distance of each city from the port (historical port advantages attract FDI but are not relevant to the current USC), along with a more detailed justification for the choice of instrumental variables, including why they are valid and relevant.
- Regional heterogeneity analysis:
The regional heterogeneity analysis is limited to the Eastern, Northeastern, Central, and Western regions. It is recommended that consideration be given to including more detailed regional analyses, such as resource and non-resource cities, to provide a more nuanced understanding of regional differences.
- Policy recommendations
The policy recommendations are somewhat general and could be more specific. At the same time, the policy recommendations need to fit with the conclusions of the article and provide more specific and actionable policy recommendations.
6.Further theoretical analysis needs to be explored, e.g. through which channels FDI affects USC.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsVery interesting article because of the subject matter. The article described: environmental regulation, foreign direct investment and urban sustainable competitiveness.
The article assumes two hypotheses and builds a model. Study confirms the inverted U-shaped relationship between FDI and USC.
The paper contains significant information adequate to justify publication. The article makes appropriate use of the literature.
One should agree with the author, that "Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) plays a crucial role in enhancing Sustainable Urban Competitiveness (USC)... USC re-flects the capacity of urban areas to improve citizens' welfare by strengthening their eco-nomic, social, ecological, innovation, and global connectivity aspects, while seeking sys-temic optimization (Ni, 2013). It integrates multiple dimensions of urban development, with the most fundamental being the factors of production, which drive economic produc-tivity and resource allocation".
The authors wrote that there are still some questions stemming this analysis that need to be further studied and presented them.
It has been rightly noted that in the environmental regulation can regulate and optimize the effect of FDI on USC.
The topic discussed in the article is important for all those who deal with BIZ. The special attention should be paid in enterprises to improving the quality of FDI and increasing the quantity of FDI from technology-intensive industries such as scientific research and technology services, information transmission, software and information technology services, especially high-tech industries.
The abstract lacks information on the methods used in the article - please add it.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis version is better，I would like to accept
