Analysis of the Impact of Ownership Type on Construction Land Prices Under the Influence of Government Decision-Making Behaviors in China: Empirical Research Based on Micro-Level Land Transaction Data
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors45-46 Could you please clarify the list “methods such as transfer, equity participation, leasing, and transfer” as there appears to be duplication.
52-53, 63-64 Align the number of types and clearly express the relationship of the additional factor - is it a sixth type or one of the listed five? If the authors write “another factor”, then there are 6 types. Also, it would be worthwhile to connect this classification with the “three types of control factors influencing land prices” (301-308) and corresponding Land parcel attributes. This would make the connection between the theoretical part and the model more logical.
86-87 Could you explain in more detail what constitutes “greater restrictions compared to that of state-owned construction land”?
97-99 There exists research indicating the need for government intervention regarding land, since land is not a traditional commodity - it has broader functions than just space or building location. I suggest supplementing the material with arguments in favor of state/collective regulation of land use.
143-144 It would be better to provide a comparison of income of rural residents rather than absolute values. Or combine this with facts from the following sentence.
215-253 I don’t question the model itself, but it would be good to add references to studies that apply the Moderating Effect Model to construction land prices, ownership, spatial planning or supply plan etc.
It would also be interesting if the authors added a little explanation about access to land in the context of the risks that cause high land prices.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageI would suggest reviewing the grammar and spelling for accuracy.
Author Response
- 45-46 Could you please clarify the list “methods such as transfer, equity participation, leasing, and transfer” as there appears to be duplication.
Response: Please see page 2, lines 49-50, The sentence was changed to “modes such as transfer, equity participation and leasing”.
- 52-53, 63-64 Align the number of types and clearly express the relationship of the additional factor - is it a sixth type or one of the listed five? If the authors write “another factor”, then there are 6 types. Also, it would be worthwhile to connect this classification with the “three types of control factors influencing land prices” (301-308) and corresponding Land parcel attributes. This would make the connection between the theoretical part and the model more logical.
Response: Please see page 2, lines 58-66, in order to align the factors in the literature review with those in the subsequent analysis and make the connection more logical, sentences about factors in the Introduction were modified and reorganized to “Scholars mostly believe that the factors influencing construction land prices can be categorized into five types. The first type is parcel characteristics of land, including land area, usage duration, land-use type, transaction mode, transaction time, and floor area ratio [5-7]. The second type is geographic location of land, including distance from land to city centers, commercial hubs, schools, parks, and water sources [8-10]. The third type is neighborhood conditions of land, including population, GDP, fiscal revenue, and per capita income [11-12]. The fourth type is property rights of land, including land ownership types and integrity of property rights [13-15]. The fifth type is land policies, including land supply policies and spatial planning regulations [16-18] ”
- 86-87 Could you explain in more detail what constitutes “greater restrictions compared to that of state-owned construction land”?
Response: Please see page 2, lines 90-92, the sentence was changed to “the use rights of COCL remain subject to greater restrictions compared to that of state-owned construction land, such as discouraging its development in downtown area and controlling its supply scale by the government” to better explain the restrictions.
- 97-99 There exists research indicating the need for government intervention regarding land, since land is not a traditional commodity - it has broader functions than just space or building location. I suggest supplementing the material with arguments in favor of state/collective regulation of land use.
Response: Please see page 3, lines 102-104, the sentence was changed to “The use rights of COCL is subject to more restrictions by the government such as discouraging its development in downtown area and limiting its supply scale compared to state-owned construction land” to supplement the material supporting the arguments.
- 143-144 It would be better to provide a comparison of income of rural residents rather than absolute values. Or combine this with facts from the following sentence.
Response: Please see page 4, lines 146-150, the sentences were changed to “In 2019, its secondary and tertiary industries accounted for 98.4% of the total GDP, with the national average being 92.9%; its the urbanization rate was 68.14%, with the national average being 60.6%; its per capita disposable income of rural residents was 32,400 yuan, with the national average being 16,021 yuan [24-25]”.
6.215-253 I don’t question the model itself, but it would be good to add references to studies that apply the Moderating Effect Model to construction land prices, ownership, spatial planning or supply plan etc.
Response: Please see page 6, lines 224-225, the sentence was changed to “The Moderating Effect Model is a commonly used method in the studies on land prices [14, 31]” to add two references to studies that apply the Moderating Effect Model to land prices.
- It would also be interesting if the authors added a little explanation about access to land in the context of the risks that cause high land prices.
Response: Please see page 2-3, lines 90-94, explanation about the relationship between use rights and prices of land was already given.
- I would suggest reviewing the grammar and spelling for accuracy.
Response: The language of the article was improved regarding the use of words, grammar and so on (see the details in the Manuscript).
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a very interesting and well-written paper. The propsoed methodolgy used in the paper is appropriate and empirical results have important policy implications for the government of China. My only concern for the paper is that the author(s) should give us more solid arguments about their empirical findings. What are their contributions compared to previous studies? All these need to be addressed in the future revised version of paper.
This study analyzed the impact of ownership on construction land prices using micro-level land trans- 12 action data from Wujin District, Changzhou City from 2015 to 2021, and investigated the role of 13 government decision-making in this relationship. The selected topic of this paper is of theoretical value and practical significance. The research methods are appropriate. However, there are also some shortcomings that can be modified and improved, as follows:
1. The abstract should be better written in a parsimonious manner. You should make sure the abstract is clearly written following the structure below to maximize the impact of your article. The first sentence in the abstract should be about what is the problem or motivation or question. Second sentence should be about what we already know from the literature.
2. The Introduction should detail highlight the contribution of the paper to the academic literature.
3. The literature review is partial and incomplete. Furthermore, the study predominantly cites Chinese journal articles, with a limited representation of English-language sources.
4. The theoretical framework should be discussed more in detail.
5. The empirical analysis is overly simplistic, lacking robustness checks, mechanism analysis, and treatment of endogeneity.
6. The language level of the article needs to be improved. Proofreading by a native speaker is required.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
This is a very interesting and well-written paper. The propsoed methodolgy used in the paper is appropriate and empirical results have important policy implications for the government of China. My only concern for the paper is that the author(s) should give us more solid arguments about their empirical findings. What are their contributions compared to previous studies? All these need to be addressed in the future revised version of paper.
- The abstract should be better written in a parsimonious manner. You should make sure the abstract is clearly written following the structure below to maximize the impact of your article. The first sentence in the abstract should be about what is the problem or motivation or question. Second sentence should be about what we already know from the literature.
Response: Please see page 1, lines 10-11 and 15-16, the sentences were changed to “Under China’s dual land ownership system, the use rights of urban land (state-owned) and rural land (collective-owned) are not equal.” and “and investigated the role of government decision-making behaviors such as spatial planning and supply plan in this relationship” to better reflect the problem and intention.
Please see page 1, lines 11-13, the sentence “Understanding the roles of ownership type and government decision-making behaviors in the formation of land prices is crucial for further reform to promote “equal rights and equal prices” for urban and rural land.” was added to clarify the motivation.
- The Introduction should detail highlight the contribution of the paper to the academic literature.
Response: Please see page 2, lines 79-83, the sentence “The results can provide a better understanding on the pricing of land with different ownership type for the academic circle, as well as a decision-making basis for further reform to promote “equal rights and equal prices” for urban and rural land in China and in other countries.” was added to highlight the contribution.
- The literature review is partial and incomplete. Furthermore, the study predominantly cites Chinese journal articles, with a limited representation of English-language sources.
Response: The literature review was rewritten(Please see page 2, lines58-66), and three english-language articles were added.
Page 14, lines 450-451: Dunford, R.W.; Marti, C.E.; Mittelhammer, R.C. A Case Study of Rural Land Prices at the Urban Fringe Including Subjective Buyer Expectations. Land Economics, 1985, 61(1), 10-16.
Page 14, lines 473-474: Kheir, N.; Portnov, B.A. Economic, demographic and environmental factors affecting urban land prices in the Arab sector in Israel. Land Use Policy, 2016, 50, 518-527.
Page 14, lines 502-503: Schmidt, L;, Odening, M.; Ritter, M. Do non-farmers pay more for land than farmers? European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2024, 51(4), 1094-1128.
- The theoretical framework should be discussed more in detail.
Response: Some parts of the Theoretical framework were revised to reflect more details (see the detail in the Theoretical framework).
- The empirical analysis is overly simplistic, lacking robustness checks, mechanism analysis, and treatment of endogeneity.
Response: The robustness was already checked in Results(see the detail in table 3-5).
Please see page 7, lines 264-266, the endogeneity was already treated in Model construction.
Please see page 9, lines 327-330, The sentence was changed to “Because compared to state-owned construction land, COCL is subject to restrictions by the government such as discouraging its development in downtown area and limiting its supply scale, resulting in weaker exclusivity and stability of its use rights, thereby limiting its market prices” to detail the mechanism analysis.
6.The language level of the article needs to be improved. Proofreading by a native speaker is required.
Response: The language of the article was improved regarding the use of words, grammar and so on, with the help of a native speaker (see the details in the Manuscript)
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview: Analysis of the impact of ownership on construction land prices under government decision-making regulations in China: An empirical research based on micro-level land transaction data
The manuscript addresses an interesting issue of transactions in land, but needs improvement in several respects:
The text is in more places difficult to interpret: for example 'construction land prices' could be rendered more readable through 'prices on land intended for construction purposes'. However, this expression is not precise either, so 'prices on land which through spatial planning is designated for construction' would probably be better, if this reflects the intended reality.
Similarly, 'the impact of ownership on construction land prices' (l. 52) is disturbing, as it is not ownership per se, but ownership type which affects prices. This is in line with the quoted Wu et al (2022) (l. 64), thus in l. 71 and 74 and further, 'ownership type' seems more appropriate than 'ownership'.
A deeper problem regards the relations between 'government decision-making' (l.72,75), 'spatial planning' and the provision of 'supply plan' (l. 80), 'administrative interventions from both the government and the collective' (l. 98), and 'Land-use planning' (l 109-). These administrative processes are described through headlines only, leaving the reader desoriented. For example, lines 111-114 may suggest that 'spatial planning' is the term for regulations in urban areas, while 'land-use regulations' regards rural areas. Anyway, this ought to be stated in a systematic context, specifying for each level of government the basic concepts and regulations concerning the administration of land. Examples of (undefined) basic concepts are 'downtown area', 'construction zones' (l. 108), and 'zoning district' (l. 421).
It is stated that 'local governments regulate the market through the formulation of land supply plan, .. .. ' (l. 123) and that 'urban growth boundaries must be delineated' (l.107). Regarding the study area, 'Wujin District' is mentioned, but it is not specified whether this is the specific (and only?) official body involved in the market regulation. Also, regulation problems encountered during the addressed period and regulation intensions are left unanswered, which likely implies that experiences gained are harder to transfer to other locations.
Details:
The use of abbreviations, e.g. COCL, in the Abstract should definitively be avoided.
'construction land quatos' (l. 37) should be 'construction land quotas'
'this study excluded residential land' (164-). Table 1 (l.309) has X9 and X10 regarding schools. - But are schools relevant for non-residential land?
Author Response
Reviewer 3
Analysis of the impact of ownership on construction land prices under government decision-making regulations in China: An empirical research based on micro-level land transaction data. The manuscript addresses an interesting issue of transactions in land, but needs improvement in several respects.
- The text is in more places difficult to interpret: for example 'construction land prices' could be rendered more readable through 'prices on land intended for construction purposes'. However, this expression is not precise either, so 'prices on land which through spatial planning is designated for construction' would probably be better, if this reflects the intended reality. Similarly, 'the impact of ownership on construction land prices' (l. 52) is disturbing, as it is not ownership per se, but ownership type which affects prices. This is in line with the quoted Wu et al (2022) (l. 64), thus in l. 71 and 74 and further, 'ownership type' seems more appropriate than 'ownership'.
Response: Please see page 2, lines 56-58, the sentence was changed to “with one key issue being the impact of ownership type (i.e, state-owned or collective- owned) on construction land prices (i.e, the transaction prices of land planned for construction purpose)” to better interpret the concepts.
Besides, “ownership” was all changed to “ownership type” in the article (see the details in the Manuscript).
- A deeper problem regards the relations between 'government decision-making' (l.72,75), 'spatial planning' and the provision of 'supply plan' (l. 80), 'administrative interventions from both the government and the collective' (l. 98), and 'Land-use planning' (l 109-).
Response: Please see page 3, lines 102-104, the sentence was changed to “ The use rights of COCL is subject to more restrictions by the government such as discouraging its development in downtown area and limiting its supply scale compared to state-owned construction land” to clarify the relations between these concepts.
Besides, “government decision-making behaviors” was explained by adding “such as spatial planning and supply plan” in this article (see the details in the Manuscript).
- These administrative processes are described through headlines only, leaving the reader desoriented. For example, lines 111-114 may suggest that 'spatial planning' is the term for regulations in urban areas, while 'land-use regulations' regards rural areas. Anyway, this ought to be stated in a systematic context, specifying for each level of government the basic concepts and regulations concerning the administration of land. Examples of (undefined) basic concepts are 'downtown area', 'construction zones' (l. 108), and 'zoning district' (l. 421).
Response: Please see page 3, lines 111-117, the concepts of “spatial planning” and “land-use regulations” were already explained
Please see page 3, lines 112-115, the sentence concerning “downtown area” and “construction zones” was changed to “urban growth boundaries must be delineated in the planning of downtown area (i.e, the core area within a city that undertakes primary urban functions) by local urban planning authorities to limit urban sprawl and development” to better explain the concepts.
Please see page 13, line 431, “zoning district” was changed to “locations”.
- It is stated that 'local governments regulate the market through the formulation of land supply plan, .. .. ' (l. 123) and that 'urban growth boundaries must be delineated' (l.107). Regarding the study area, 'Wujin District' is mentioned, but it is not specified whether this is the specific (and only?) official body involved in the market regulation. Also, regulation problems encountered during the addressed period and regulation intensions are left unanswered, which likely implies that experiences gained are harder to transfer to other locations.
Response: Please see page 3, lines 112-115 and 128-129, the sentences were changed to “urban growth boundaries must be delineated in the planning of downtown area (i.e, the core area within a city that undertakes primary urban functions) by local urban planning authorities to limit urban sprawl and development” and “Local land management authorities regulate the market through the formulation of land supply plan intended to maintain the stability of land prices” to specify official bodies and to reveal the intentions.
- The use of abbreviations, e.g. COCL, in the Abstract should definitively be avoided. 'construction land quatos' (l. 37) should be 'construction land quotas'
Response: “COCL” was all changed to “collective-owned construction land” in the Abstract (see the details in the Abstract).
Please see page 1, line 41, “construction land quatos” was changed to “construction land quotas”.
- 'this study excluded residential land' (164-). Table 1 (l.309) has X9 and X10 regarding schools. - But are schools relevant for non-residential land?
Response: Under the current admission system in China, the qualifications for students to enroll in schools are linked to both their parents’ residential properties and working places, meaning that schools are indeed relevant for non-residential land.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFine, the performed improvements welcomed!
