Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The main purpose of this paper tries to calculate the green innovation efficiency for various cities in the Yangtze River Economic Belt.  Also, the green innovation network has been investigated by using a gravity model. Finally, the micro-dynamic mechanism of green innovation networks was analyzed by using spatial econometric modeling.  In general, the topic of this paper is interesting, and maybe bring some policy reference for green innovation and economic development.  However, I have some main questions of this paper as follows:

1. The variables of this article are too much. I suggest that authors should modify the expression of the variables in three models to make it easier to read.
2. As for the literature review, authors provide the simulation and controls ideas of green innovation system in Figure 1. Can authors explain the linkage between green innovation system and three empirical models? Which position are the three empirical methods individually or comprehensively presented in this system? Please clarify.
3. As for the methodology, index system for measuring green innovation efficiency is presented in Table 1. However, it is not easy to read which variables are desirable or undesirable outputs? Author should modify the presentation of these variables in Table 1 more clear. Also, these inputs and outputs do not have any resource or reference information to express the reason why these variable are suitable.
4. As for the last section, I suggest the authors to decompose the conclusion and policy implication section. The policy implication and discussion are generally addressed in the last part of the result section while the conclusion summarizes the most important contribution of the study.
5. The author should list some limitations of this study in the last section.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewers:

        Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt” (ID: 1484886). We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. Revised portion are marked by highlight in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

1. The variables of this article are too much. I suggest that authors should modify the expression of the variables in three models to make it easier to read.

Responses: We renamed the variables in the model to make it easier to read and understand. Please see the highlights on Pages 6, 7(Table 1)，8(Table 2) and 15(Table 5) of the paper.

 

2. As for the literature review, authors provide the simulation and controls ideas of green innovation system in Figure 1. Can authors explain the linkage between green innovation system and three empirical models? Which position are the three empirical methods individually or comprehensively presented in this system? Please clarify.

Responses: System prediction model is an effective tool to use historical data to speculate the development and evolution of the system, which lays the foundation for subsequent system optimization and regulation. Multidimensional collaborative control model and dynamic simulation model can identify the main factors that affect the operation of the system, and can provide operability schemes for the smooth and orderly operation of the green innovation system. Please see the highlights on Page 5 of the paper.

 

3. As for the methodology, index system for measuring green innovation efficiency is presented in Table 1. However, it is not easy to read which variables are desirable or undesirable outputs? Author should modify the presentation of these variables in Table 1 more clear. Also, these inputs and outputs do not have any resource or reference information to express the reason why these variable are suitable.

Responses: We re encode and rearrange the variables to make them look more orderly and easy to read and understand. At the same time, we provide relevant references to ensure the applicability of these variables in measuring the efficiency of green innovation[4,19,24].Please see the highlights on Page 6(Table 1) of the paper.

4. As for the last section, I suggest the authors to decompose the conclusion and policy implication section. The policy implication and discussion are generally addressed in the last part of the result section while the conclusion summarizes the most important contribution of the study.

Responses: According to the modification suggestions, we have fine-tuned the structure of the article, added a new chapter "policy implications", and revised the title of Chapter 6 to "conclusions and prospects". Please see the highlights on Pages 15 and 16 of the paper.

 

5. The author should list some limitations of this study in the last section.

Responses: In the chapter of “conclusion and prospect”, we combed the limitations of the research, and put forward some ideas for the future research focus. Please see the highlights on Pages 17 of the paper.

Reviewer 2 Report

This study generates a logical framework for green innovation network analysis by conducting an in-depth study on the Yangtze River Economic Belt. It has addressed the gap in the literature clearly. The research methodology is well designed with a clear data analysis. Overall, the paper follows logical structure, and contributes to theories green innovation. I have a couple of suggestion.

- The authors can further compare the findings with current literature in the discussion session.
- Yangtze River Economic Belt has its unique feature. The authors can further explain how findings from the study can be generalised to other regions and countries in the discussion/conclusion sessions.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewers:

        Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt” (ID: 1484886). We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. Revised portion are marked by highlight in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

1. The authors can further compare the findings with current literature in the discussion session.

Responses: We fine tune the structure of the article, compare the conclusions with existing studies in the chapter "conclusions and prospects", and put forward ideas for future research. Please see the highlights on Page 17 of the article.

 

2. Yangtze River Economic Belt has its unique feature. The authors can further explain how findings from the study can be generalised to other regions and countries in the discussion/conclusion sessions.

Responses: The formation or structure of green innovation network is different in different regions or countries, but the imbalance of network structure is common. Therefore, we explain how to solve or deal with the imbalance of green innovation network structure, which has good applicability to the development of different regions. Please see the highlights on Page 17 of the article.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

In the paper, the authors discuss the problem of green innovation network 
considering its spatial,  relational dimension, and systems dimension. The paper enriches  the body of knowledge on the issue, however has some gaps and inconsistencies and is at some points unclear.

The way the paper adressess a research gap should be explained better: what are the theses / research questions?

The literature review concerning the concept and definition of green innovation needs to be completed - alsmost all of the referenced texts come from 2020-21, and the majority of them are from Chinese authors. Generally, one gets the impression that hardly no literature on the subject was written before 2020.

Apart from that, findings from previous studies are hardly discussed (ln. 118-120) and a research gap was not sufficiently identified. The Authors say that "At present, there is little research on green innovation networks from a systems perspective (ln.94)" - they do not refer to any literature here.

Definition used are sometimes not clear: what is the exact definition of green innovation here? Variables taken into account for the "Index system for measuring green innovation efficiency" (table 1) suggest that you include all innovation activity and account for their environmental impact. What is the methodology used for the calculation of the comprehensive index of environmental pollution?

Many other variables were not clearly defined:

- "Fi and Fj represent the green innovation efficiency of city i and city j respectively" - ln. 266 - are these the same as 'rho' in the formula 1, as it was described as  the efficiency of urban green innovation (ln.237)

Eij - economic distance between city i and city j (ln. 267)
K - the correction coefficient - where does it come from?

(Formulas 3 and 4 seem to be missing). 

G represents node outputs and inputs (ln. 306) - what exact measure of outputs and inputs was applied?

q - the total strength of green innovation connections to node - what is the definition?

In the subchapter 4.2.1. the density of the green innovation network is discussed, but the definition and formulas were not provided before. 

What exact criteria were applied to distinguish Core Network, Support
Network; Basic Network; and Edge Network?

The paper is lacking a discussion with existing literature.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewers:

        Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt” (ID: 1484886). We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. Revised portion are marked by highlight in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

1. The authors can further compare the findings with current literature in the discussion session.

Responses: We fine tune the structure of the article, compare the conclusions with existing studies in the chapter "conclusions and prospects", and put forward ideas for future research. Please see the highlights on Page 17 of the article.

 

2. Yangtze River Economic Belt has its unique feature. The authors can further explain how findings from the study can be generalised to other regions and countries in the discussion/conclusion sessions.

Responses: The formation or structure of green innovation network is different in different regions or countries, but the imbalance of network structure is common. Therefore, we explain how to solve or deal with the imbalance of green innovation network structure, which has good applicability to the development of different regions. Please see the highlights on Page 17 of the article.

Dear Reviewers:

            Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt” (ID: 1484886). We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. Revised portion are marked by highlight in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

1. The way the paper adressess a research gap should be explained better: what are the theses / research questions?

Responses: How to establish a universal analysis framework of green innovation network is the key issue we pay attention to. Secondly, we investigate the characteristics of green innovation network from different angles, and try to decompose the micro-structure and micro-dynamic mechanism of green innovation network. Please see the highlights on Page 3 of the paper.

 

2. The literature review concerning the concept and definition of green innovation needs to be completed - alsmost all of the referenced texts come from 2020-21, and the majority of them are from Chinese authors. Generally, one gets the impression that hardly no literature on the subject was written before 2020.

Responses: We have updated relevant references about the concept and definition of green innovation [14, 15, 19, 20, 23 and 30], so as to ensure the sustainability and objectivity of our research. Please see the highlights on Page 3, 18 and 19 of the paper.

 

3. Apart from that, findings from previous studies are hardly discussed (ln. 118-120) and a research gap was not sufficiently identified. The Authors say that "At present, there is little research on green innovation networks from a systems perspective (ln.94)" - they do not refer to any literature here.

Responses: The defects of existing research only focus on the calculation of green innovation efficiency and the research on influencing factors. Our main contribution is to establish a complete analysis framework and explain the evolution process of green innovation network from the micro level. After modification, we compare the gap with the existing literature, and put forward the concept definition of green innovation.Please see the highlights on Page 3 of the paper.

 

4. Definition used are sometimes not clear: what is the exact definition of green innovation here? Variables taken into account for the "Index system for measuring green innovation efficiency" (Table 1) suggest that you include all innovation activity and account for their environmental impact. What is the methodology used for the calculation of the comprehensive index of environmental pollution?

Responses: We redefined the concept of green innovation and combed the index system of green innovation efficiency measurement again, and made clear the specific links of each index in the process of green innovation to ensure the validity of the measurement results. At the same time, the calculation method of comprehensive index of environmental pollution is supplemented. Please see the highlights on Page 6 of the paper.

 

5. Many other variables were not clearly defined: ①- "Fi and Fj represent the green innovation efficiency of city i and city j respectively" - ln. 266 - are these the same as 'rho' in the formula 1, as it was described as  the efficiency of urban green innovation (ln.237)  ;②Eij - economic distance between city i and city j (ln. 267); ③K - the correction coefficient - where does it come from? (Formulas 3 and 4 seem to be missing).④ G represents node outputs and inputs (ln. 306) - what exact measure of outputs and inputs was applied? ⑤ q - the total strength of green innovation connections to node - what is the definition?⑥ In the subchapter 4.2.1. the density of the green innovation network is discussed, but the definition and formulas were not provided before. ⑦What exact criteria were applied to distinguish Core Network, Support Network; Basic Network; and Edge Network? The paper is lacking a discussion with existing literature.
   Responses:①In this paper,  and  are equivalent. Since Formula 1 and formula 2 are two completely independent models, we choose different variable expressions when building the model. After modification, we especially explain the relationship between the two variables (equivalent to  in Formula 1).Please see the highlights on Page 7 of the paper.

②The sources of  and  in formula 2 have been explained in the chapter of “data exploration”. It is a common method to obtain the geospatial distance through the map vectorization method, which has the advantages of high accuracy and fast operation speed. The economic distance is expressed by the GDP difference between the two cities; Please see the highlights on Page 9 of the paper.

③ The function of the correction coefficient  is to ensure that the data results have good discrimination and avoid the data characteristics being covered up due to the large magnitude difference. Its value is generally obtained according to the actual situation of the data and has little impact on the analysis of the calculation results. Please see the highlights on Page 7 of the paper.

④ and respectively represent the out-degree and in-degree of green innovation network, both of which can be accurately measured by Ucinet software. For the convenience of reading and understanding, we added a note " each variable in Table 1 can be calculated by the software Ucinet "at the bottom of Table 2. Please see the highlights on Page 9 of the paper.

⑤represents the sum of green innovation related values of all other nodes directly connected with node , which is calculated by formula 2. Please see the highlights on Page 9(Table 1: Note) of the paper.

⑥We are very sorry that we have not explained the formula and meaning of network density. After modification, chapter 3.1.3 was added. Please see the highlights on Page 7,8 of the paper.

⑦The green innovation correlation value determines the connection strength between different cities, which is why the differentiated network structure is formed. Different network structures represent different development stages of cities, which is of great significance for analyzing the complexity of green innovation network structure and its evolution law. Please see the highlights on Page 12 and 17 of the paper.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors have revised the manuscript based on my previous comments.

I recommend to accept this manuscript for publishing on Sustainability.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewers:

        Thank you very much for your patient and meticulous comments on the article. These guiding opinions are of great significance to improve our research and also provide inspiration for the follow-up research.

        Best wishes！

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors, thank you for the effort you made to consider my comments. I'd like to make a few additional ones:

I suggested that the definition of the the comprehensive index of environmental pollution was added. And you did that, partially. The referenced sources do not explain the composition of the index. In my opinion, this should be explained in more detail: 

You mention that the index "includes wastewater, waste gas and solid waste". Is this a total volume of wastewater or pollution loads? what substances? If the index includes the emission of gases - which ones? Total amount of solid waste? How is hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste accounted for?

What are the exact types of activities you consider as green innovation when you define the variables in the table 1 (patent authorization amount, 
turnover in technology market, number of papers published). What criteria are used here?

Definitions of the the geographical and economic distance could be introduced earlier, where they are mentioned for the first time (now it is ln. 816).

Definitions of four levels of sub-networks according to the correlation strength between cities were provided, but they are descriptive (ln. 1008). I'm sure that the Authors use some value ranges here and they should be provided.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewers:

        Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Analysis on Evolution Characteristics and Dynamic Mechanism of Urban Green Innovation Network: A Case Study of Yangtze River Economic Belt” (ID: 1484886). We have studied comments carefully and have made correction. Revised portion are marked by highlight in the paper. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

1. You mention that the index "includes wastewater, waste gas and solid waste". Is this a total volume of wastewater or pollution loads? what substances? If the index includes the emission of gases - which ones? Total amount of solid waste? How is hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste accounted for ?

Responses：All the calculated indicators are based on the total amount, and these data can be obtained in the China Urban Statistical Yearbook. We have added the accounting scope of each indicator and the specific accounting items included in this paper. Please see the highlights on Page 6 and 7 of the article.

 

2. What are the exact types of activities you consider as green innovation when you define the variables in the table 1 (patent authorization amount, turnover in technology market, number of papers published). What criteria are used here?

Responses：Green innovation is a very broad concept. We think that for a city, green innovation refers to everything that can improve the urban ecological environment and help to achieve sustainable development. It may be the proposal of a new eco-economic theory or the birth of a new environmental protection technology. Considering the problem of quantification of indicators, we selected the indicators such as the amount of patent authorization and the transaction volume of technology market. In this paper, we further explain the connotation of green innovation. Please see the highlights on Page 6  of the article.

 

3. Definitions of the the geographical and economic distance could be introduced earlier, where they are mentioned for the first time (now it is ln. 816).

Responses：We put the specific meanings of geographical distance and economic distance in the variable explanation of Formula 2 to ensure the coherence of the article context. Please see the highlights on Page 7  of the article.

 

4. Definitions of four levels of sub-networks according to the correlation strength between cities were provided, but they are descriptive (ln. 1008). I'm sure that the Authors use some value ranges here and they should be provided.

Responses：In order to ensure the best visualization effect, we use the natural discontinuity method to divide different network levels, and the specific dividing limits have been given in this paper. Please see the highlights on Page 12  of the article.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.