Impact of Urban Air Quality on Total Factor Productivity: Empirical Insights from Chinese Listed Companies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The research discusses an important point, such as air pollution, the importance of sustainability, concern for human health, and environmental preservation, but several questions must be answered before agreeing to publish, such as:

The objective of the research paper must be written clearly and specifically

The sentence(s) are written and abbreviated at the first mention of them in the paper and are not repeated after that. Only the abbreviation is mentioned - please review this throughout the paper (shaded example in the attached file).

Add a table of abbreviations at the end of the search

In lines 122 to 127, it is preferable to change the word section to a clause or item because this is a paper and not a book or chapter

Figure 1 is unclear and weak - please add the figure with better efficiency

As for the Hunt (H1,.....) in the paper, can it be written together in one table, better than its current state?

In the tables, the P-value is zero. What is the purpose of mentioning it? Please explain or delete

References 40 and 41 are old (more than 20 years ago). Is there an explanation for that?

Ensure that chemical symbols and valences are written correctly

The conclusion is supposed to be based on the results reached by the authors, so why were all these references mentioned in the conclusion? Please clarify and explain the importance.

An important note: although the research on air pollution mentioned ISO 14001 environmental standard, it did not mention any air specifications and permissible limits in the entire research!!!

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to express our gratitude for your review of the manuscript. Your suggestions have been invaluable in improving the quality of the article. We have revised and responded to your comments point by point.

Please see the attachment for detailed information.

We would like to thank you once again for your selfless contribution to this article.

Have a good day!

Author Team

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

I have been invited to review the paper “Impact of Urban Air Quality on Total Factor Productivity: Empirical Insights from Chinese Listed Companies?”

After having gone through your paper, I would like to share with you the following recommendations:

·         Please explain to the reader, who is not familiar with China, the relevance and appropriateness of your using the Qinling-Huaihe River line.

·         Period covered by your paper: Please justify the representativeness of the period 2015-2020 to achieve the results of your research, particularly since it is only a period of six years and it coincides with the outbreak of the COVID-9 pandemic. Also, please explain why one does not go beyond 2020.

·         6. Conclusions: Please clarify the scope of your recommendations. Exclusively for China? Could you please comment on the relevance of both your findings and recommendations for other world regions and countries?

Thank you in advance and good luck,

Anonymous reviewer

Author Response

We would like to express our gratitude for your review of the manuscript. Your suggestions have been invaluable in improving the quality of the article. We have revised and responded to your comments point by point.

Please see the attachment for detailed information.

We would like to thank you once again for your selfless contribution to this article.

Have a good day!

Author Team

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The reviewed article titled Impact of Urban Air Quality on Total Factor Productivity: Empirical Insights from Chinese Listed Companies – the title of the article tells the content.

I will provide review comments referring to individual parts of the article:

Abstract - begins with methodological assumptions and should begin with information about the importance and topicality of the presented topic, then the main goal (specific goals), the main hypothesis (detailed hypotheses).

Keywords - keywords should be shorter - one (two) words

Introduction: contains the part between lines 100-127, which should be included partly in the methodology of the research (what concerns the method of analysis) and partly in the summary (what concerns the results obtained).

Theoretical analysis and hypothesis formulation chapter – does not raise any objections from the reviewer. The hypotheses are formulated correctly, adequately justified and provide a chance for verification.

I do not raise any critical comments about the way the analyzes were carried out - appropriately selected research methods were used and the previously formulated research hypotheses were correctly verified.

The latest literature is cited in an appropriate number, the subject matter of which is consistent with the issues discussed in the article.

The article presents interesting issues and has been prepared quite carefully, so I suggest that it be accepted for publication, after taking into account the corrections indicated in the review comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We would like to express our gratitude for your review of the manuscript. Your suggestions have been invaluable in improving the quality of the article. We have revised and responded to your comments point by point.

Please see the attachment for detailed information.

We would like to thank you once again for your selfless contribution to this article.

Have a good day!

Author Team

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

No more comments