Spatio-Temporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of Open Economy Development in the Yangtze River Delta Area

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Based on the analysis of China's open development mechanism at the current stage, this paper analyzes the spatial and temporal patterns and influencing factors of the high quality development level of its open economy, taking the Yangtze River Delta region as an example, and provides relevant experience for the development of open economy in other regions of China.

However, there are still some shortcomings in the paper, which are recommended to be accepted after minor revision.

The main issues are as follows.

(1) Extend the time series of the study to 2020 or 2021 to observe the impact of the COVID19 on the open economy.

(2) Some maps in the paper are not standardized, please refer to the journal requirements for revision.

Author Response

Q1：将研究的时间序列延长至2020年或2021年，以观察COVID19对开放经济的影响。

对审稿人评论1的回应： 感谢您的宝贵意见。在修改过程中，我们也想扩展数据，但由于数据采集和存储的限制，有几个指标样本数据要到2019年才能提供，数据严重缺失。这种修改无法实现，因此我们在论文末尾的前景部分添加了这一不足，希望后续研究能够得到进一步的丰富和改进。具体如下：“同时，由于数据采集和储备存在局限性，研究样本的数据只能收集到2019年，但后续研究可以提前到2022年，以进一步探讨新冠肺炎疫情对中国开放经济发展的相关影响。（第1580-1583行）

 

Q2：论文中的部分地图没有标准化，请参考期刊要求进行修订。

对审稿人评论2的回应： 感谢您的建设性意见。在修订稿中，我们根据期刊的要求对地图进行了修订，重新绘制了图表，统一了标准化，提高了图表的准确性。(408，852，1053线）

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

I am missing the methods and in the results the reasons for doing the specific statistical tests. I do see you have used the Hausmann test but from the test results, I do not see why should you use the random effects and not the fixed effects instead. I have not seen any stationarity tests. You should, besides the Hausmann test also use some stationarity testing and show the results. What if, some dynamic method of inference does a better job instead? I do miss a thorough ex-ante and post hoc testing of the results. Now, we do not know if appropriate testing methods have been used since no fully appropriate testing methods have been used. If necessary draw a flow chart representing the data. Try to represent better the methods.

Best regards,

reviewer

Author Response

Q1: I am missing the methods and in the results the reasons for doing the specific statistical tests. I do see you have used the Hausmann test but from the test results, I do not see why should you use the random effects and not the fixed effects instead. I have not seen any stationarity tests. You should, besides the Hausmann test also use some stationarity testing and show the results. What if, some dynamic method of inference does a better job instead? I do miss a thorough ex-ante and post hoc testing of the results. Now, we do not know if appropriate testing methods have been used since no fully appropriate testing methods have been used. If necessary draw a flow chart representing the data. Try to represent better the methods.

Response to Reviewer comment No.1: Thanks for your valuable comment. I'm sorry for the vague introduction of model selection. In the revised version, we added the results of the stability test and multicollinearity test of panel data, explained the steps of model selection and the test results in detail, and drew a flow chart to show the scientificity of the model. In addition, we also tested the robustness of the model analysis results in Section 4.4.3, It further shows the accuracy of the model analysis results. The specific modifications are as follows：

From the previous analysis, we know that the development level of the open economy in the YRDA has a certain spatial correlation, so we choose the SDM to ana-lyze the influencing factors (Figure 7). Before the model selection, we conducted sta-tionarity and multicollinearity tests on the collected panel data to avoid spurious re-gression. The results showed that the panel data was relatively stable. But we found that the variance inflation factors of two variables, GDP per capita (X1) and the post and telecommunications business volume (X9), were much larger than the critical value of 10, so they failed the test and were removed. Therefore, the remaining eight explanatory variables were selected as the influencing factors of the level of open economy development in the YRDA and used to construct a relevant analysis model. We take the logarithm of all indicators to eliminate the effect of heteroscedasticity. Then, we combine the three-step method proposed by Elhorst to select the specific form of the spatial panel measurement model.

First, the LM test is used to determine whether to reject the non-spatial model and accept the spatial lag model (SLM), the spatial error model (SEM) or the SDM. Ac-cording to the p-value results of four statistics LM Spatial Lag, Robust LM Spatial Lag, LM Spatial Error and Robust LM Spatial Error that the null hypothesis that there is no Spatial Lag or Spatial Error model is rejected, so the Spatial econometric model should be chosen (Table 8). Secondly, the data are subject to the Hausman test to determine whether to select the fixed or random effect. The results show that the Hausman test rejects the null hypothesis at the significance level of 1%. Hence, the model using spa-tial fixed effects is more consistent with the model's estimation effect than random ef-fects. In addition, the model can be controlled according to individual fixed effect, time fixed effect and double fixed effect, and time fixed effect is selected as the best model by comparing goodness of fit R2. Finally, the SDM is constructed on this basis, and whether the SDM can be simplified to SLM or SEM is tested by Wald and LR statistics. The test results of Wald and LR both passed the significance test and rejected the orig-inal hypothesis, which indicates that SDM cannot be simplified to SLM and SEM. Therefore, the SDM is the most appropriate choice. (lines 1066-1102)

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

 

Firstly, I would like to thank you for your work in this field.

You did a good job!

But for the current version, after a comprehensive reading, I have some minor comments for it, not many, but essential.

 

For revision details, please see the followings:

1. the title is a little bit longer, I suggest you delete the first 3 words 'analysis of the'. It can make it more readable.

2. please check the abstract's word counting. The journal requirement is maxing 200.

3. I suggest you streamline the results' content in the abstract section and add a description of the methods you used.

4. line 57, generally, a single point's references should not be more than 3. 

5. I suggest you add more methods described in your introduction chapter. Why should you adopt these methods in your research, and why are they necessary? Because there are oceans of methods that can do this analysis, and I think there is much similar research already, through your manuscript, what is the main innovation or contribution in this area?

6. I suggest you check all of your tables' formats. They are a little bit different from the template.

7. There is a problem with the horizontal and vertical axes of Table 4. The year corresponds to the city. the 'year' should be changed to 'city'. In addition, I suggest adding a column for ranking.

 

Again, I have a highly comment on your contribution.

The upon revision recommendations are helping this manuscript be more readable for readers.

Author Response

Q1: the title is a little bit longer, I suggest you delete the first 3 words 'analysis of the'. It can make it more readable.

Response to Reviewer comment No.1: Thanks for your valuable comment. According to reviewer’s suggestions, we have changed the title to " Spatio-temporal Evolution and influencing factors of Open Economy Development in the Yangtze River Delta Area". (lines 1-3)

 

Q2: please check the abstract's word counting. The journal requirement is maxing 200.

Response to Reviewer comment No.2: Very thanks for reviewer’s constructive comments. After in-depth thinking, we have rewritten the abstract. The specific content is " Since economic globalization is unstable, it is difficult for the traditional open economic develop-ment model to meet the requirements of China's development, and there is an urgent need for new ideas and models to be reoriented. Based on the analysis of the development mechanism of China's open economy at this stage, we used the entropy method, Theil coefficient, Gini coefficient, and spatial Durbin model (SDM) to analyze the Spatio-temporal pattern and influencing factors of the high-quality development level of the open economy in the Yangtze River Delta Area (YRDA). The results indicated that during the study period, the development level and development difference of open economy were on the rise, and the spatial difference in different regions was significant. The development of open economy was affected by many factors, and there was a spatial spillover effect. Based on the existing problems, at the stage of high-quality economic development, the YDRA should seize the opportunities brought by the new development pattern, improve government services, optimize innovation drive, and promote the development of open economy to a higher level. We believe that the results of this study can also provide relevant experience for the devel-opment of open economy in other regions of China.". (lines 13-26)

 

Q3: I suggest you streamline the results' content in the abstract section and add a description of the methods you used.

Response to Reviewer comment No.3: Thanks for your valuable comment. In the revised draft, we have rewritten the abstract, and simplified the results as required, and added a description of the use method. The specific content is " Since economic globalization is unstable, it is difficult for the traditional open economic develop-ment model to meet the requirements of China's development, and there is an urgent need for new ideas and models to be reoriented. Based on the analysis of the development mechanism of China's open economy at this stage, we used the entropy method, Theil coefficient, Gini coefficient, and spatial Durbin model (SDM) to analyze the Spatio-temporal pattern and influencing factors of the high-quality development level of the open economy in the Yangtze River Delta Area (YRDA). The results indicated that during the study period, the development level and development difference of open economy were on the rise, and the spatial difference in different regions was significant. The development of open economy was affected by many factors, and there was a spatial spillover effect. Based on the existing problems, at the stage of high-quality economic development, the YDRA should seize the opportunities brought by the new development pattern, improve government services, optimize innovation drive, and promote the development of open economy to a higher level. We believe that the results of this study can also provide relevant experience for the devel-opment of open economy in other regions of China.". (lines 13-26)

 

Q4: line 57, generally, a single point's references should not be more than 3.

Response to Reviewer comment No.3: Thanks for your valuable comment. In the revised draft, we have reorganized the references and reduced them to 3. (line 137)

 

Q5: I suggest you add more methods described in your introduction chapter. Why should you adopt these methods in your research, and why are they necessary? Because there are oceans of methods that can do this analysis, and I think there is much similar research already, through your manuscript, what is the main innovation or contribution in this area?

Response to Reviewer comment No.3: Very thanks for reviewer’s constructive comments. After careful consideration, we added explanations to these methods used in the study, and explained the reasons for choosing, the purpose, and their uses in the 3.2 method introduction. We reorganized the introduction and clarified the shortcomings of previous research and the main innovation points and purposes of our research. The details are as follows " As for the study of influencing factors, scholars at home and abroad continue to enrich them from both theoretical and empirical study and analysis through the ideology of cross-sectional data and multiple regression, but the consideration of spatial factors has not been taken into account, and there is a lack of analysis on regional het-erogeneity and spatial spillover effects." and "Via academic study, the multi-dimensional perspective of open economy analysis was expanded, and a powerful way is provided for an in-depth under-standing of the development pattern of the open economy and its driving forces. The existing problems in the relevant research also provide a new direction for the devel-opment of this study. Apart from the above issues, most existing research focuses on the development of the past open economy. But as China's economy moves from a phase of rapid growth to a phase of high-quality development, and driven by the "Double-cycle" development strategy, China's open economy development has been transformed from a traditional "Quantity-driven" model to an "Innovation-led" model of high-level development. Under such conditions, what are the changes in the development mechanism of China's open economy? What are the ways to promote the effective development of an open economy? These are the vital issues that we need to think about. Moreover, because of the influence of the spatial variability of the re-search objects, the policy recommendations put forward by the previous research have problems of weak universality and insufficient pertinence, which can't effectively re-flect the overall characteristics of China's open economic development. The YRDA is one of the core regions with the most active economic development, vital openness, and innovation ability in China. It is the most representative region in the develop-ment process of China's open economy and plays a vital role in China's opening-up strategy. Therefore, starting from the new environment of China's open economic development, based on the discussion of the development mechanism of China's open economy at the present stage, this paper selects three provinces and one city in the YRDA as a case study to analyze the space-time pattern and influencing factors of its open economic development level, and then finds out the problems and proposes solu-tions. We hope that it can provide a reference basis for enhancing the competitiveness of the YRDA in the domestic and international cycle, promoting regional integration, speeding up the development of a higher-level open economy, and providing the rele-vant experience for the development of open economy in other regions of China.". (lines 155-204,442-446,460-462,468-471,482-484,495-496,517-519)

 

Q6: I suggest you check all of your tables' formats. They are a little bit different from the template.

Response to Reviewer comment No.3: Thanks for your valuable comment. In the revised draft, we have revised all forms according to the format requirements of the journal. (lines 529,625,774,798,817,1023,1039,1110,1249,1261)

 

Q7: There is a problem with the horizontal and vertical axes of Table 4. The year corresponds to the city. the 'year' should be changed to 'city'. In addition, I suggest adding a column for ranking.

Response to Reviewer comment No.3: Very thanks for reviewer’s constructive comments. In the revised draft, we have modified the table as required and added ranking , as follows (line 774):

City	2005	2010	2015	2019	M	R	City	2005	2010	2015	2019	M	R
Shanghai	0.271	0.467	0.494	0.615	0.435	1	Taizhou	0.044	0.059	0.075	0.090	0.068	22
Suzhou	0.200	0.287	0.329	0.365	0.305	2	Lianyungang	0.054	0.062	0.070	0.075	0.066	23
Hangzhou	0.113	0.186	0.256	0.278	0.209	3	Tongling	0.052	0.069	0.076	0.069	0.066	24
Nanjing	0.124	0.153	0.212	0.263	0.183	4	Huaian	0.033	0.090	0.071	0.088	0.065	25
Ningbo	0.113	0.147	0.195	0.214	0.173	5	Taizhou	0.046	0.054	0.071	0.088	0.065	26
Wuxi	0.105	0.155	0.182	0.213	0.167	6	Lishui	0.035	0.042	0.077	0.066	0.065	27
Changzhou	0.076	0.119	0.149	0.174	0.131	7	Xuzhou	0.031	0.048	0.064	0.088	0.057	28
Jiaxing	0.083	0.101	0.132	0.164	0.122	8	Yancheng	0.029	0.048	0.056	0.077	0.056	29
Nantong	0.080	0.096	0.116	0.124	0.109	9	Bengbu	0.039	0.037	0.065	0.068	0.055	30
Zhenjiang	0.075	0.104	0.107	0.111	0.105	10	Xuancheng	0.030	0.036	0.060	0.068	0.052	31
Huzhou	0.069	0.089	0.107	0.132	0.099	11	Huainan	0.053	0.044	0.057	0.052	0.051	32
Hefei	0.067	0.078	0.103	0.153	0.096	12	Quzhou	0.029	0.036	0.060	0.068	0.046	33
Zhoushan	0.058	0.080	0.141	0.109	0.095	13	Huaibei	0.028	0.039	0.053	0.052	0.045	34
Shaoxing	0.061	0.078	0.117	0.115	0.094	14	Chuzhou	0.021	0.025	0.050	0.062	0.044	35
Jinhua	0.054	0.065	0.096	0.117	0.090	15	Suqian	0.020	0.027	0.062	0.061	0.041	36
Yangzhou	0.058	0.091	0.085	0.108	0.088	16	Lu'an	0.025	0.027	0.047	0.062	0.041	37
Huangshan	0.051	0.071	0.080	0.088	0.079	17	Bozhou	0.019	0.028	0.049	0.055	0.040	38
Wenzhou	0.047	0.055	0.088	0.111	0.077	18	Suzhou	0.021	0.027	0.047	0.068	0.039	39
Wuhu	0.053	0.067	0.090	0.104	0.077	19	Anqing	0.024	0.030	0.037	0.047	0.037	40
Ma'anshan	0.046	0.069	0.084	0.099	0.074	20	Fuyang	0.026	0.029	0.034	0.049	0.036	41
Chizhou	0.042	0.051	0.081	0.085	0.070	21

Notes: M is the mean value of the development level of the open economy in each region from 2005 to 2019; R is the ranking of the development level of open economy in various regions.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the corrections. The paper is now much more readable and enjoyable.

Now, after your additional explanation, I am fully convinced that the methods you used are fully commensurate to the data.

I am very happy with the paper as it is now.

As far as I'm concerned, it is ready for publishing as it is.

Best regards,