An Empirical Study of the Measurement of Spatial-Temporal Patterns and Obstacles in the Green Development of Northeast China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors, the themes of green development and their impacts and linkages to sustainable development are undoubtedly relevant research topics at present. The author’s indicator system for the green development level in Northeast China was built and adapted. The article contains new original results, which are of great interest for researchers in the field of green development of territories. At the same time, the proposed methodological approach is systemic in nature and can be used to assess the level of green development of other territories, as well as to make appropriate management decisions based on its results.
As recommendations for improving the article, we can mention the need for more detailed disclosure of the limitations of the conducted research and its prospects in the conclusions section.
Author Response
Point 1: As recommendations for improving the article, we can mention the need for more detailed disclosure of the limitations of the conducted research and its prospects in the conclusions section.
Response 1: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have added and revised more detailed disclosure of the limitations of the conducted research and its prospects in the conclusions section of revised manuscript, as stated in line 679-681 “The evolution characteristic ...... the natural embodiment of the socioeconomic development law ”, 683-685 “In view of the limitation ...... the regional green development is facing great challenges” , 691-695 “our research also preliminarily found ...... geographical spatial heterogeneity and spatial correlation” . Please inspect in the attachment!
Reviewer 2 Report
This interesting research is framed within the regional and development studies. It is possible to appreciate a good commitment by the authors to support this research, the underlying ideas, and the valuable objectives. However, I believe that the following comments could help to improve the quality of this article to meet the standards of the Journal.
49-51. Academic citations required. Please identify a basic definition of "traditional development" to better focus on the underlying theoretical background.
56-58. although the paper is mainly focused on the Chinese area, in the introduction can be expected some more international references on the named "dilemma by oppressing both resources and the environment", some examples could be included.
60-63. academic references on Boulding's Theory are missing, please refer to the following one as an example:
- Valentinov, V. (2015). Demand, supply, and sustainability: Reflections on Kenneth Boulding's evolutionary economics. Society & Natural Resources, 28(11), 1216-1232.
A more systematic analysis and disclosure of the evolution of the theories is required. There is only an attempt to cover a period between the 1960s and the financial crisis of 2008. The authors seem to "jump" directly from the industrial revolution to the new millennium.
78-80. missing academic references.
84-85. missing academic references.
89-94. missing academic references.
161. "local and international scholar" rather than "scholars at home and abroad" seems more appropriate.
163-165. please back up the claimed "irrelevance" with some references, if any.
173-200. The authors refer to "empirical investigations", "policy guidance", "scientific development", "industrial stagnation and recession", completely omitting any reference.
238. Please specify the sources of data, in order to assess their reliability.
244. What kind of "different research fields and perspectives" are the authors referring to, in particular?
267-287. The drivers in use seem to be all appropriate, however, a better description of each indicator is expected to be disclosed to improve transparency and understanding. (This info can be provided eventually as an appendix). The related sources of data (please move paragraph 2.3 "data sources" first) can be disclosed earlier to ground the reliability of the discussion.
291. The table does include the weights before explaining the methodology of their determination (par. 2.2.2), the authors can (alternatively), move that table after the "Entropy Weight TOPSIS Model" or include a sentence before the table to specify that the attribution of the weights is explained later.
428-431. Please provide a definition of each level to better frame the results, and refer to other researches that previously used the ArcGIS software, if any.
464-469. Although the TOPSIS Model seems to be appropriate, I am concerned by the fact that the frequencies are heavily affected by the higher weights attributed to the drivers (it is not a coincidence that those with higher weights are usually better ranked). Some statistical tests can be made to mitigate this concern and eventually to confirm or reject the results. (DEA Analysis could be eventually considered as a viable option).
492-494. Missing academic references.
573-577. The identified limitations can be also somehow reported in the introduction, to better help the reader considering the focus of the paper, which excluded urbanization, industrial structure, population density...
I enjoyed reading and reviewing this paper, especially with regard to the results, which are in line with the Journal's aims.
The above revisions are mainly related to the introduction (lack of systematic analysis of the literature) and some concerns are also addressing the methodology.
I am available and happy to revise again the updated paper once resubmitted.
Best regards
Author Response
Point 1: 49-51. Academic citations required. Please identify a basic definition of "traditional development" to better focus on the underlying theoretical background.
Response 1: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have added a basic definition of "traditional development" and academic reference in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 54-58 “The traditional development concept is based on ...... ‘material capital’ superior than ‘human capital’ [1]” . Please inspect!
Point 2: 56-58. although the paper is mainly focused on the Chinese area, in the introduction can be expected some more international references on the named "dilemma by oppressing both resources and the environment", some examples could be included.
Response 2: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have added more international examples on the named "dilemma by oppressing both resources and the environment" in the introduction of revised manuscript, as stated in line 63-65 “such as photochemical smog incidents ...... Chernobyl nuclear leakage incidents in Ukraine, etc” . Please inspect!
Point 3: 60-63. academic references on Boulding's Theory are missing, please refer to the following one as an example:
- Valentinov, V. (2015). Demand, supply, and sustainability: Reflections on Kenneth Boulding's evolutionary economics. Society & Natural Resources, 28(11), 1216-1232.
Response3 : The authors have added academic references on Boulding's Theory in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 82-84 “Green development, an economic development ...... appeared in Boulding’s theory of a spaceship economy in the 1960s [5]” . Please inspect!
Point 4: A more systematic analysis and disclosure of the evolution of the theories is required. There is only an attempt to cover a period between the 1960s and the financial crisis of 2008. The authors seem to "jump" directly from the industrial revolution to the new millennium.
Response4 : Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have added a more systematic analysis and disclosure of the evolution of the green development theories in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 68-81 “Green development is a historical process ...... the formation of the idea of green development” . Please inspect!
Point 5: 78-80. missing academic references.
Response 5: The manuscript line number mentioned by the reviewer is not symmetrical with the manuscript line number downloaded by the authors. The authors try our best to keep up with the reviewer’s ideas to modify the manuscript. If there is any inappropriate place, the authors hope that reviewer can help point out. Thank you!
The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 97-100 “China, as the largest ...... in its 13th Five-Year Plan [11]” . Please inspect!
Point 6: 84-85. missing academic references.
Response 6: The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 104-106 “green development is gradually transitioning...... from its initial stage to a mature stage[12,13]” . Please inspect!
Point 7: 89-94. missing academic references.
Response 7: The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 116-118 “The usual formulation includes ...... differences between definitions are not large[14]” . Please inspect!
Point 8: 161. "local and international scholar" rather than "scholars at home and abroad" seems more appropriate.
Response 8: The authors have followed the reviewer's comments to revise the phrase in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 187-188 “On the whole, local and international scholars have produced considerable research ......” . Please inspect!
Point 9: 163-165. please back up the claimed "irrelevance" with some references, if any.
Response 9: The authors found that the word "irrelevance" was inappropriate, and the word had been deleted from the revised manuscript and the expression of the sentence was supplemented, as stated in line 191-193 “ ‘green development’ but that are essentially less relevant, mainly because of the failure to clarify the logical relationship between ‘green’ and ‘development’ [1]” . Please inspect!
Point 10: 173-200. The authors refer to "empirical investigations", "policy guidance", "scientific development", "industrial stagnation and recession", completely omitting any reference.
Response 10: The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 201-203 “empirical investigations of green development ......from a geographical or spatial perspective [28,29,31]” , 204-206 “most studies suggest that ...... policy guidances are insufficient, and feasibility of proposed solutions are poor [28-30]” , 212-214 “industrial growth saw widespread stagnation and recession ...... various social development problems emerged [39]” , 227-228 “green development also offers a new idea for the scientific development ...... ecological security areas in Northeast China [40]” . Please inspect!
Point 11: 238. Please specify the sources of data, in order to assess their reliability.
Response 11: The authors have moved paragraph 2.3 “Data Sources” to 2.1 “Study Case and Data Sources” in order to enhance their reliability in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 265-270 . Please inspect!
Point 12: 244. What kind of "different research fields and perspectives" are the authors referring to, in particular?
Response 12: The authors have explained the different research fields and perspectives in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 276-277 “In view of the different research fields and perspectives [13,15-20], such as economics, management, sociology, environment, ecology, etc”. Please inspect!
Point 13: 267-287. The drivers in use seem to be all appropriate, however, a better description of each indicator is expected to be disclosed to improve transparency and understanding. (This info can be provided eventually as an appendix). The related sources of data (please move paragraph 2.3 "data sources" first) can be disclosed earlier to ground the reliability of the discussion.
Response 13: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have changed “driving forces” to “drivers” in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 16, 293, 301, 389, 458. The authors have followed the reviewer's comments to add a better description of each indicator in Table 1 “Basic Description” column of the revised manuscript. The authors have moved paragraph 2.3 "Data Sources" to 2.1 “Study Case and Data Sources”in order to ground the reliability of the indicators’ discussion in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 265-270. Please inspect!
Point 14: 291. The table does include the weights before explaining the methodology of their determination (par. 2.2.2), the authors can (alternatively), move that table after the "Entropy Weight TOPSIS Model" or include a sentence before the table to specify that the attribution of the weights is explained later.
Response 14: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have followed the reviewer's comments to move the table 1 after the “Entropy Weight TOPSIS Model”. Please inspect!
Point 15: 428-431. Please provide a definition of each level to better frame the results, and refer to other researches that previously used the ArcGIS software, if any.
Response 15: The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 461-464 “the natural breaks method in ArcGIS software ...... high level, medium-high level, medium-low level and low level [1,43]”. Please inspect!
Point 16: 464-469. Although the TOPSIS Model seems to be appropriate, I am concerned by the fact that the frequencies are heavily affected by the higher weights attributed to the drivers (it is not a coincidence that those with higher weights are usually better ranked). Some statistical tests can be made to mitigate this concern and eventually to confirm or reject the results. (DEA Analysis could be eventually considered as a viable option).
Response 16: Reviewer’s concern that“the frequencies are heavily affected by the higher weights attributed to the drivers”, the authors do not deny the fact. Because this is one of the reasons why the TOPSIS model has been criticized all the time，as stated in line 325-329 “The TOPSIS model provides a comprehensive evaluation method ...... the weight of each indicator is too rough in the evaluation process, resulting in deviations in practical application”. That’s the reason that the entropy weight TOPSIS model is the improvement of the TOPSIS model method, as stated in line 330-332. “the entropy weight TOPSIS model is introduced in this paper, as it can effectively eliminate the influence of subjective factors and scientifically and objectively reflect the regional green development level”. That is, the entropy weight TOPSIS model’s biggest advantage is to determine the weight of the evaluation indicator through the entropy value method, and then scientifically measure the evaluation object level. Reviewer’s concern that “it is not a coincidence that those with higher weights are usually better ranked”, the authors think that the entropy weight TOPSIS model is essentially a comprehensive evaluation method, and Its numerical value itself is determined by the index value and the weight. Therefore, the authors believes that the reviewer’s concern is a common phenomenon in the application of comprehensive evaluation method rather than the individual shortcoming of the entropy weight TOPSIS model.
For the suggestion that DEA analysis can eventually be regarded as a viable option, the authors think that reviewer’s comments are pertinent. At present, the green development measure method can be divided into three categories: single index evaluation, green efficiency evaluation and comprehensive index evaluation. Among them, single index evaluation is based on a certain framework from a certain side of green development analysis, and the common models including green GDP accounting, decoupling index ,and carbon profit and loss. Compared with the traditional efficiency evaluation method, green efficiency evaluation increases the consideration of environmental pollution caused by the operation of economic system, and the related research more relies on the DEA analysis. Comprehensive index evaluation could be divided into various types according to the different research objects, and the related research more relies on the comprehensive evaluation method, such as the entropy weight TOPSIS model. Generally speaking, when selecting the specific green development measurement method, it is necessary to fully consider the actual situation and purpose of the study area in order to achieve the best evaluation effect. In the revised manuscript, the authors hold that green development is a systemic problem involving many factors, such as economy, society, resources, environment, technology, culture, etc, as stated in line 278-285 “green development is an economic development model ...... emphasizes the symbiosis of economic, social and natural systems and the diversification of development goals [20]”. And meantime,The authors mentioned that “the entropy weight TOPSIS model, which is a basic decision technology in system engineering, is commonly applied to resolve the multiobjective decision problem of a finite scheme” in the discussion section, as stated in line 550-552. These evidences fully illustrate that the entropy weight TOPSIS model is suitable for horizontal and vertical analysis of green development level in Northeast China.
If there is any inappropriate place, the authors hope that reviewer can help point out. Thank you!
Point 17: 492-494. Missing academic references.
Response 17: The authors have added academic references in the revised manuscript, as stated in line 524-426 “Northeast China, as an important old industrial base ...... resource exploitation and rational ecological protection [44]” . Please inspect!
Point 18: 573-577. The identified limitations can be also somehow reported in the introduction, to better help the reader considering the focus of the paper, which excluded urbanization, industrial structure, population density...
Response 18: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have followed the reviewer's comments to added the identified limitations in the abstract section of revised manuscript, as stated in line 42-46 “In the future, our research should fully consider the role of urbanization, industrial structure, population density ...... seek an important entry point to achieve regional man-earth coordination”. Please inspect!
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors addressed most of my comments.
English and the Referencing style need revision BEFORE the publication.
Author Response
Point 1: English and the Referencing style need revision BEFORE the publication.
Response 1: Reviewer’s comments are pertinent. The authors have the English and the Referencing style in the revised manuscript thoroughly checked and edited. Please inspect!
