Research on Regional Differences and Influencing Factors of Chinese Industrial Green Technology Innovation Efficiency Based on Dagum Gini Coefficient Decomposition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study applies the frontier-based methodology of efficiency estimation with spatial components for analysis of green technology innovations in Chinese provinces.

The literature review is good and up to date. The applied methodology (SBM + spatial panel econometric model) is quite standard, but its appropriateness and inputs are well justified by the Authors.

The paper text is well-structured and clear, except of several minor issues:

1. Abbreviations (like SBM, CCR, etc.) should be explicitly defined on the first use
2. SBM is referred both as “super efficient” and “super efficiency”. The second variant is the correct one and should be used consistently.
3. Sentence in Line 330 is incomplete

The primary contribution of the paper is the empirical results on green technology innovation in Chinese provinces. The results are good, but, probably, a note about their potential generalisation could be beneficial for the Readers, who are not directly interested in Chinese economics.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Manuscript ID land-1505305

Title: “Research on Regional Differences and Influencing Factors of Chinese Industrial Green Technology Innovation Efficiency Based on Dagum Gini Coefficient Decomposition”

Thank you for your letter and comments from referees on our above-named paper. We have carefully studied the comments and criticisms offered by the referees and made a thorough revision on the original paper. The revised paper is forwarded herein. The following just details what we have done to the original paper, with a 1-1 point responses with respect to referees' comments.

We feel that the new version of the paper is much improved thanks to the comments and suggestions of the referees. We hope that the revised paper has now met the high standard requirements of your journal and would be pleased to hear from you again.

Sincerely yours

Point by point responses to referees’ comments

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

The study applies the frontier-based methodology of efficiency estimation with spatial components for analysis of green technology innovations in Chinese provinces.

The literature review is good and up to date. The applied methodology (SBM + spatial panel econometric model) is quite standard, but its appropriateness and inputs are well justified by the Authors.

The paper text is well-structured and clear, except of several minor issues:

1.Abbreviations (like SBM, CCR, etc.) should be explicitly defined on the first use

2.SBM is referred both as “super efficient” and “super efficiency”. The second variant is the correct one and should be used consistently.

3.Sentence in Line 330 is incomplete

The primary contribution of the paper is the empirical results on green technology innovation in Chinese provinces. The results are good, but, probably, a note about their potential generalisation could be beneficial for the Readers, who are not directly interested in Chinese economics.

Point 1: Abbreviations (like SBM, CCR, etc.) should be explicitly defined on the first use

Response 1: The reviewer's comments are useful and relevant.

I have explained the above abbreviations when I first mentioned them. It has been modified in the revised version. See below for more information.

Slacks-Based Measure (SBM) model; Data envelopment analysis (DEA) model; Banker, Charnes and Cooper (BCC) model; Charnes, Cooper and Rhodes (CCR) model.

Point 2: SBM is referred both as “super efficient” and “super efficiency”. The second variant is the correct one and should be used consistently.

Response 2: The reviewer's suggestion is helpful.

I have revised all the places where“super efficient” appears in the full text to “super efficiency”.

Point 3: Sentence in Line 330 is incomplete

Response 3: The reviewer's comments are useful and relevant. I have modified the paragraph in Line 330 to the following.

The sample of this paper selected the historical data of 30 provinces (cities and autonomous regions) in China from 2005 to 2018. Considering the availability and authenticity of the data, the sample does not include Tibet Autonomous Region, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. The index data of this paper comes from China Statistical Yearbook, China Environmental Statistics Yearbook, annual report of China Patent Statistics, Statistical Yearbooks of provinces and cities and EPS database. Among them, the missing data of the year is supplemented by interpolation.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read this valuable manuscript. The topic is interesting and current. The structure of the paper is logically established and the consistency of the argument is clear. The methods of research are proper.

I strongly encourage the authors to present some of the results on maps. It would enrich the message of content and facilitate the reception.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Manuscript ID land-1505305

Title: “Research on Regional Differences and Influencing Factors of Chinese Industrial Green Technology Innovation Efficiency Based on Dagum Gini Coefficient Decomposition”

Thank you for your letter and comments from referees on our above-named paper. We have carefully studied the comments and criticisms offered by the referees and made a thorough revision on the original paper. The revised paper is forwarded herein. The following just details what we have done to the original paper, with a 1-1 point responses with respect to referees' comments.

We feel that the new version of the paper is much improved thanks to the comments and suggestions of the referees. We hope that the revised paper has now met the high standard requirements of your journal and would be pleased to hear from you again.

Sincerely yours

Point by point responses to referees’ comments

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Thank you for the opportunity to read this valuable manuscript. The topic is interesting and current. The structure of the paper is logically established and the consistency of the argument is clear. The methods of research are proper.

Point 1: I strongly encourage the authors to present some of the results on maps. It would enrich the message of content and facilitate the reception.

Response 1: Thank you so much for your comments. I added three figures to make readers better understand the empirical results.

Figure 2. Intra-regional differences in industrial green technology innovation efficiency (GTIE) from 2005 to 2018

Figure 3. Inter-regional differences in industrial green technology innovation efficiency (GTIE) from 2005 to 2018

Figure 4. Contribution rate in industrial green technology innovation efficiency (GTIE) from 2005 to 2018

Reviewer 3 Report

The article presents the impact of the effectiveness of green technology innovation on economic growth and development.

The study was written correctly, the abstract is correct reflecting the content of the publication. The analysis of the literature, introducing the subject of the publication and concerning the currently conducted research on GTIE, was conducted in a factual manner.

The research sample seems sufficient as well as the time period long enough (2005-2018) to achieve reliable results. One might wonder whether the division of the research area into three regions should not be better justified, or whether it would not be advisable to distinguish sub-regions in order to provide a clearer picture of the variability. Overly elaborate sentences are not conducive to a good reception and quick assimilation of research results by an average viewer. It should be considered whether it would not be possible to use more accessible language in the description and conclusions.    

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewer,

Manuscript ID land-1505305

Title: “Research on Regional Differences and Influencing Factors of Chinese Industrial Green Technology Innovation Efficiency Based on Dagum Gini Coefficient Decomposition”

Thank you for your letter and comments from referees on our above-named paper. We have carefully studied the comments and criticisms offered by the referees and made a thorough revision on the original paper. The revised paper is forwarded herein. The following just details what we have done to the original paper, with a 1-1 point responses with respect to referees' comments.

We feel that the new version of the paper is much improved thanks to the comments and suggestions of the referees. We hope that the revised paper has now met the high standard requirements of your journal and would be pleased to hear from you again.

Sincerely yours

Point by point responses to referees’ comments

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

The article presents the impact of the effectiveness of green technology innovation on economic growth and development.

The study was written correctly, the abstract is correct reflecting the content of the publication. The analysis of the literature, introducing the subject of the publication and concerning the currently conducted research on GTIE, was conducted in a factual manner.

The research sample seems sufficient as well as the time period long enough (2005-2018) to achieve reliable results.

Point 1: One might wonder whether the division of the research area into three regions should not be better justified, or whether it would not be advisable to distinguish sub-regions in order to provide a clearer picture of the variability.

Response 1: Thank you so much for your comments.

Since the reform and opening up, with the continuous development of China's economy, the development of eastern, central and western regions has appeared an obvious step-like distribution. The eastern region has the fastest social and economic development, while the central and western regions have successively decreased. Compared with the central and western regions, the eastern region has a higher level of economic development, relatively abundant market resources, more perfect related supporting facilities, and a large number of high-quality talents provide more perfect basic conditions for green innovation. The central and western regions are rich in natural resources, but the infrastructure is not perfect, the industrial base is weak and the technology is relatively backward, which leads to the lack of motivation for green innovation.

To sum up, according to the differences in geographical location and economic development level, and referring to the standards of the National Bureau of Statistics of China, this paper divides 30 provincial-level administrative regions (excluding Tibet, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan Province due to policy differences and data continuity) into three major economic regions: East, Central and West. The observed objects are divided into three regions, so as to realize the driving effect of the eastern provinces on the central and western provinces within the reasonable transfer and transmission cost of green innovation efficiency, promote the balanced development of green innovation in each regions, optimize the transmission mechanism of industrial green innovation efficiency among sectors, and promote the industrial green innovation and sustainable development in China.

See line 336 to 357 of the modified version.

Point 2: Overly elaborate sentences are not conducive to a good reception and quick assimilation of research results by an average viewer. It should be considered whether it would not be possible to use more accessible language in the description and conclusions.    

Response 2: In order to make it easier for the reader to understand. The last part of the article divides into Discussion and Conclusion, and uses more accessible language in the description.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx