Research on Dynamic Monitoring of Coordinated Development of Economy, Environment and High Haze Pollution Industries Such as the Thermal Power Industry in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

This is an interesting paper on the coordinated development (or lack thereof) in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei  region of China. The authors incorporate ecological measures into their assessment of development, and conclude by showing that (a) three subregions are at different stages of coordinated development, and (b) the region itself is not at a stage of coordinated development either. The paper uses an implied ecological modernization framework to evaluate their results – the implied goal is to produce relatively high economic development, relatively low use of high-polluting inputs, and a relatively high level of ecological (green space) land use.

I have two major suggestions for improvement. First, I think the paper could use some discussion of a broader context for interpreting why the analysis is important. This might involve a brief discussion of what the consequences of rapid development and rapid economic growth have meant for the ecological state of China and (especially) the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. This might include things like public health statistics, changes in the natural environment that are undesirable, etc. This could also include some discussion of the implications of not changing to a more sustainable economic development regime. You don’t want to sound alarmist, but the situation (as I understand it anyway) is quite serious and creating a regional environment that balances economic growth, energy use, and ecological sustainability will be very important for China’s future.

My second suggestion might not be doable, but I will bring it up anyway. The analysis focuses solely on the region of interest and the obstacles to sustainable development that are there. But that somewhat begs the question of how this region might compare (on similar measures) to a region in a developed nation like (say) Germany or France. If one compared Berlin and Paris (and their surrounding areas), how would they score on measures like those used here?? If Berlin and Paris don’t score particularly well that is o.k. for your analysis – you can claim the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei does not want to repeat their mistakes. If Berlin or Paris score substantially better, then that gives readers some idea what a real-world benchmark would look like.

Finally, the analysis seems to be driven by an ecological modernization framework, which is fine. But that framework is never mentioned. Perhaps that is discussed extensively in the literature sited, but it would be worth mentioning as the model the analysis derives from as a general guide for readers.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your valuable comments. We attach great importance to your comments and have made the following modifications according to them

1. This paper adds some extensive background discussion in the introduction and briefly discusses the impact of rapid development and rapid economic growth on the ecological state of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.
2. It is true that there are some problems such as lacking international comparison in this paper, but the feasibility is insufficient due to reasons such as cost and time. Considering these factors, these problems are put into the Inadequacies and limitations part.
3. This paper adds more content related to the explanation of the ecological modernization framework that we use.

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper constructs a coupling coordination degree model of the economy, environment, and high haze pollution industries based on the physical coupling theory, and calculates the evaluation index of coordinated development of the economy, environment, and high haze pollution industries in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in China. The idea of this paper is interesting. However, many issues and concerns should be considered.

 

1.      Introduction

Introduction is very small, please extend this part, and write the significance of the study very clearly.

 

2.      Literature Review:

 

The literature used in this paper is very old.  Authors need to add the latest citations regrading this study.

 

3.      Section 2.2. Research methods

 

 There are many sweeping sentences like (Evaluation indicators of economic   development. Economic aggregate and…… the indicator system is a direct product of the operationalization of the concept….), Author need to make clear and connecting statements.

 

4.      Section 3.2. Results and analysis of longitudinal monitoring

The author should present the reasons for using the longitudinal monitoring and the advantages of the method. Wrong sentences (Through reaching deep into the indexes in the evaluation index system) are used.

 

5.       Conclusions and recommendations

 

Conclusions should be crisper and to the point. if the authors want to add their recommendation, they can include a perspective section before conclusions and one more thing that need to be discuss that every study has flaws and limitations, please mention the weakness of this study.

 

6.      The language of the paper should be improved to be suitable for an international audience. More specifically, the authors are recommended to consult an English native-speaker to enhance the manuscript because there are a lot of grammar, sentences completion, clarity, and correctness mistakes. 

 

Recommendation: MAJOR REVISION IS REQUIRED

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your valuable comments. We attach great importance to your comments and have made the following modifications according to them:

1. This paper adds some of the reference parts of the content and research significance.
2. Some newer literature was added to the citation.
3. In this paper, the content of the research method index is improved.
4. The reasons for using longitudinal detection and the advantages of the research methods used in this paper are added, and the incorrect sentences are modified.
5. In this paper, the conclusions are simplified and the inadequacies and limitations of this study are added.
6. The language problems in this paper are corrected more comprehensively.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper has been able to develop adequate perspectives for analyzing the high haze pollution issue based on the physical coupling theory. The argument is supported by extensive time series data analysis. As the paper is worth publishing for its highly dynamic analysis and a rich source of comparative insights and information supported by solid data, I am inclined to spend a little more time to provide the following comments for further improvement:

1． Some formatting is broken, affecting the reader's interpretation.（Table 1, Table 2）

2． For mean and standard deviation values, the number of decimal places should be aligned to three or four. （Table 1）

3. The resolution of figures should be increased to make them easier to read.

4. Introduction: The short introduction presents a complete understanding of the aim of this paper. It would be better to add an introduction to the current process and the situation of the collaborative governance of the ecological environment and the Dilemmas in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei.

5. Methods: The OECD has developed a "PSR Framework" as a basis for considering the development of environmental indicators.　Based on the PSR,　as indicators for evaluating social and economic development, it would be desirable to add automobile ownership and road traffic volume to the list of indicators.

6. It is very interesting that you pointed out the particular phenomenon of the "prisoner's dilemma." The more detailed explanation is needed. (page 10)

7. The study's results are clear, but a more detailed discussion of the technological innovation capability in relation to the model analysis is needed. (page 13)

8．References(page 14)

Unnecessary line breaks were found.( No.6, No.17)

A punctuation mark is missing.(No.11)

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your valuable comments. We attach great importance to your comments and have made the following modifications according to them:

1. The formatting problems of Table 1 and Table 2 have been corrected.
2. The number of decimal places of mean value and standard value in Table 1 has been aligned to three.
3. The resolution of the figures has been adjusted.
4. In the introduction part,  the current process and dilemma of eco-environmental collaborative governance in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region are added.
5. The suggestion of increasing the evaluation index is very good, but due to the large time and workload, we have not made any modifications in this aspect. Our team will consider adopting your suggestion in later research.
6. The content of scientific and technological innovation ability is added to the result part.
7. We've fixed formatting errors and punctuation errors in the references part.