OFDI, Industrial Structure Upgrading and Green Development—Spatial Effect Based on China’s Evidence
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
After through reading of Your manuscript, I've found presented research very interesting and well organized. Of course I pointed some minor issues especially to the presenatation of the results (figures and tables), but overall the manuscript is of very good quality. My final decision is to accept the manuscript after minor revision.
Detailed comments:
Line 23-24: Keywords should be in an alphabetical order. Moreover do not use the same words or phrase as in the title - it is totally forbidden.
Line 58-67: In the last paragraph of Introduction chapter I missed clearly defined aim of the study. In the current form it is hidden in the text. Please improve it during revision.
All figures in the manuscript are of poor quality, especially the fonts are blurry and hard to read. I strongly recommend to improve it.
The values presented in the Tables should be given to 3 significant places (e.g., 0,11; 0,01; 10,1; 100)
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I am grateful for the possibility to become familiar with this manuscript. Here are my remarks:
1. The abstract of the article does not correspond to the IMRAD scheme. An abstract should briefly, concisely and clearly summarize basic goals, methods, results and conclusions of the study undertaken in the article. The structure of the present draft should thus follow more exactly the IMRAD scheme and highlight major findings. When searching in a database, the abstract is a basis for the reader’s decision to download the paper, read it and – maybe - quote it.
2. I would therefore recommend to take the lines 19-22 (from ‘not only...’) and put them in the very beginning of the abstract as the main goals of the paper: ‘to contribute to the advancement of studies pertaining to green development, but also offer policy recommendations for China [as well as the world] to achieve a green and low-carbon economic transformation from the perspective of OFDI and industrial structure.’
3. Instead of the findings as the last item of the current abstract, I recommend to flesh out a brief (summary of the) conclusion.
4. Speaking about the conclusion, after having read it, I have not find much of policy recommendations relevant for the 'entire world', as the authors seem to aim at in the beginning of the paper. And, even it was the case, I think that aiming at including the policy recommendations for the whole world is a bit too broad, especially given that the study was not a comparative one based on a dozen of different countries, but about only one jurisdiction. I therefore suggest to simply remove the 'world' part and leave the ambition to contribute to the advancement of studies pertaining to green development and policy recommendations for China only.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The subject of the paper is significant, the paper can be considered for potential publication after major revision.
1) The theoretical background of the paper is insufficient. Therefore, authors should provide concrete discussion in the introduction section.
2) The primary purpose of the paper was not clear. Authors should disclose the primary purpose of the paper by focusing on the question of “why is there a need for investigate FDI, industrial structure, and green development in China?
3) There is a need for one more round proofreading for minor grammar mistakes in the paper.
4) Disclosure of the empirical results was weak. Authors should compare their empirical estimations with former findings to see whether former literature support their findings.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript is well-written and good results have been achieved. I provide a few suggestions to improve the quality of the manuscript.
· The abbreviations should be extended for the first time.
· A geographical map can better demonstrate the locations and distributions of the studied provinces.
· The quality of the figures, especially Figure 6 can be improved.
· Section 5: the authors should demonstrate how the findings of this research are in line with previous research.
· It will be interesting if the authors can predict the effects of OFDI and Industrial Structure Upgrading on GTFP for the next decade based on the achieved results/trend from 2004-2019.
Author Response
Please refer to the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have addressed great part of former queries. Therefore, editorial can can consider the paper for potential publication.
