A Comparative Study of Sustainable Transition from Catch-up to Post Catch-up of South Korea and China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to read your paper on Comparative Study of Sustainable Transition from Catch-up to Post Catch-up of South Korea and China.
The problem described in the article is relevant, because the empirical and comparative studies that consider the essence of the experience of East Asia focused on technological capability building and transition from catch-up to post catch-up process are still rare.
Economists and policy makers all over the world are eager to understand better the remarkable technological and economic development of Korea and China from poor backward economies to economies supporting a number of world class sophisticated industries. Reflexive study of understanding transition from catch-up to post catch-up was conducted with technology cycle time, self-citation ratio at country level, and basic research expenditure of Korea and China.
In the authors words, the catch-up and overtaking require economies to pursue a path that differs from that taken by the forerunners. The important concepts here are building capabilities and leapfrogging by swiftly exploiting windows of opportunity.
The topic is actual and of interest. Title is clear and appropriate to the paper’s subject matter.
The research area is identified clearly. Keywords are proper.
The individual sections in which the authors presents his views and suggestions are arranged in a logical manner. They create clarity and readability of the exhibition.
Introduction – very detailed literature survey and a review of previous publications on the topic are presented.
The goals of the paper are clearly defined.
Clearness of task formulating of the subject of matter is clearly stated.
The hypothesis and/or arguments are clearly analyzed and support the presented results and discussion.
Illustrations as tables, graphs/figures are appropriate, clearly presented, properly cited in the text.
The research methodology is appropriate.
Research results are presented objectively and logically using tables and figures.
Conclusions are correctly and logically derived from the evidence and/or arguments, presented data.
The authors has chosen the appropriate way to explain themselves using adequate material from accessible and standard sources. The study is based on a source material consisting of 33 sources of a condensed and periodical nature. Source documentation linked to own descriptions and characteristics exhibits competence and takes account of the global achievements dealing with the discussed issues.
I believe that this paper will be of interest to the readership of your journal because East Asian countries such as Korea and China paved their own ways but share many commonalities.
This study improved on essence of the experience of East Asia focused on technological capability building and transition from catch-up to post catch-up.
Below are several suggestions that I hope will be helpful in the paper:
Abstract not fully and clearly expresses goal.
It is suggested to significantly expand the abstract, the main methods and the methodology needs to be explained in detail. In the abstract, the following sounds pretentious “strategic guideline for catch-up to post catch-up transition of developing countries?”(“Finding common grounds and patterns of Korea and China can give more clear and general understanding of East Asian development model and strategic guideline for catch-up to post catch-up transition of developing countries.”)
In Table 6, there is a technical mistake - (2030~2007), instead of the correct 2003~2007
The bibliography could inclide newer and up-to-date sources, for example, 12 out of 33 sources are from the last century, none from 2019 or 2020, almost no sources after 2014 (there is 1 of 2018, 1 of 2017, 1 of 2016, 1 of 2015).
References not include all actually cited sources. There is no citation of literature sources: 28, 33:
28.Sung, J. Post Catch-up Innovation and Integrated Innovation Policy. Science and Technology Studies, 2014, 667 6(2), 45-75.
33.OECD, Frascati Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental 677 Development. OECD, 2015.
Referencing could be more accurate and unified – sometimes whole name is written, sometimes only the surname.
In particular, it would be relevant to present at least the following articles:
S Chang, H Kim, J Song, K Lee. (2020). Technological Opportunity, Technological Leadership Change, and Latecomers’ R&D Resource Allocation between Innovation and Imitation Technological Leadership Change, and Latecomers’ R&D Resource Allocation
J Park, DJ Lee, K Lee. (2020). The Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in R&D: Different Inducement Effects of Private and Public R&D in Developed and Developing Host Countries
The Singapore Economic Review
K Lee.(2019). Economics of Technological Leapfrogging UNIDO Department of Policy, Research and Statistics Working Paper
J Park, D Ryu, K Lee. (2019). What determines the economic size of a nation in the world: Determinants of a nation’s share in world GDP vs. per capita GDP Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 51, 203-214
J Lim, K Lee. (2019). Employment effect of innovation under different market structures: Findings from Korean manufacturing firms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 146, 606-615
Keun Lee and Jongho Lee. (2019). “The National Innovation System (NIS) and Readiness for the fourth Industrial Revolution: South Korea compared with European Four Countries. (a chapter in a book Transforming Industrial Policy for the Digital Age, Pages: 68–81, DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788976152). Ed. Patrizio Bianchi, Clemente Ruiz Duran, and Sandrine Labory, 2019, E. Elgar.
K Lee. (2019). The Art of Economic Catch-up: barriers, detours and leapfrogging in innovation systems, Cambridge Univ Press, March 2019
K Lee, J Lee. (2019). National innovation systems, economic complexity, and economic growth: country panel analysis using the US patent data. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1-32
R Kang, T Jung, K Lee. (2019). Intellectual property rights and Korean economic development: the roles of patents, utility models and trademarks. Area Development and Policy, 1-23
H Shin, K Lee. (2019). Impact of Financialization and Financial Development on Inequality: Panel Cointegration Results Using OECD Data. Asian Economic Papers 18 (1), 69-90
K Lee, CY Wong, P Intarakumnerd, C Limapornvanich. (2019). Is the Fourth Industrial Revolution a window of opportunity for upgrading or reinforcing the middle-income trap? Asian model of development in Southeast Asia. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 1-18
Prof. Keun Lee, http://www.keunlee.com/
In his papers Keun Lee, one of the forefront thinkers today, a world expert on how developing countries catch up to developed ones, derives an attractive argument for the closing of the development gap between latecomers and leading countries.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.doc
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors. I have read Your paper "Comparative Study of Sustainable Transition from Catch-up to Post Catch-up of South Korea and China". This is a well written and interesting paper. However, I do have some comments:
a) The concepts of Catch up and Post Catch up need to be defined/described earlier in the paper, not all Readers are familiar With these concepts.
b) The discussion section need to be improved. The A to G notation text is confusing and do not communicate well With the Reader. Is there a better way to present this? Overall, implications are scarce and the linkages between the discussion and theoretical part of the paper is not well developed. My advice would be to totally rewrite and improve the discussion/implication part of the paper.
c) There is many tables With results. Are all of these of Equal importance, may some be removed? As it stands, it is not Clear for the Reader what is te important and less important tables presenting results. Could some of them be part of an appendix?
d) The linkage to sustainability is not well developed in the manuscript. Could you include elements making a more distinct linkage to the aim of the journal?
Good Luck With the improvement of the paper!
Author Response
" Please see the attachment"
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
