The Impact of High-Speed Rail and Central Cities on Enterprise Financing Costs

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Paper is interesting and topic is up-to-date.

Structure is very good. Literature review in my opinion is enough.

I have two critical comments:

1. I propose to change title of the paper. Current title is a list of separate things. It should be connected. Even "Relation between High-speed Rail , Central City and Enterprise Financing Cost"could be letter. However I leave final decision to Authors.

2. In my opinion Figure 2 should be improved. It will be more clear if Authors will reduce range of Dynamic Economic Effects of Policy to: (-.02;.02)

Author Response

Dear reviewer , thank you very much for your suggestions. We have made specific modifications according to your suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript is about the High-speed Rail, Central City and Enterprise Financing Costs

 The paper is well written and composed. Still needs some improvement.

 Title: Try to modify title… objective….this title is not meaningful.

 Abstract:

Suggestion-Follow the basic pattern of abstract formation….as:

I strongly encourage authors to use the following style of structured abstracts, but without headings: (1) Topic/Field: Place the  introduction of topic/field addressed in a broad context (2) Background: Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study; (3) Methods: Describe briefly the main methods or treatments applied or methodology applied; (3) Results: Summarize the article's main findings (something about quantitative/qualitative results) ; and (4) Conclusions: Indicate the main conclusions or interpretations. (5) Benefits: Add something about the benefits results of the research.  ……also give quantitative results in the abstract. 

[Please revise-according to point 4 and 5 Conclusion and benefits]

Research Gap….Please add a heading…2.4 Research Gap…elaborate research gap under that heading.

Methodology:

 -A comprehensive research framework missing- to follow the research is steps are missing. Add framework-flowchart and write this section in a stepwise pattern.

-This portion should also be written in step wise pattern so that readers can understand the procedure for implementation purposes. [Please add]

Conclusions and Discussion: Separate these headings as 5. Discussion….. 6. Conclusions….references should not be used in conclusions

 Limitations of the study:

 Add heading 7…to last para graph…..Please add a heading about the limitations of the study….theory is already there.

Author Response

Dear reviewer , thank you very much for your suggestions. We have made specific modifications according to your suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This article is relevant, since the development of high-speed railways contributes to the growth of the regional economy, however, due to the fact that it is associated with the costs of developing high-speed railway infrastructure, it is necessary to study the effectiveness of such projects in frame regional development. The article title adequately reflects the content. In the abstract, the authors briefly give the article essence, describe the problem state, research methods, results. Key words correspond to the article content.

In the introduction, the authors describe the problem relevance, and also give the article structure. The second section is devoted to a literature review, which describes the areas of research that were carried out by other authors in previous years on this issue. In the third section, the authors describe methods and materials, data sources, and the choice of indicators. The fourth section contains a numerical example of the method proposed by the authors. In the "Conclusions and Discussion" section, the authors summarize the results and indicate the study limitations.

The article is prepared in accordance with the instructions for the authors, corresponds to the topic that it explores and publishes. Theoretical and practical conclusions are supported by figures and tables that are of sufficient quality. The list of literature sources is sufficient, however, in some cases, the conclusions made by the authors based on the analysis of scientific articles (Chapter 2) do not look convincing enough, since different sources are summarized in the references, which seems incorrect.

In our opinion, the article is in line with the theme of " development of high-speed railways ".

Comment.

1. Title of section 2.1. unclear

2. In our opinion, it is necessary to more clearly formulate the purpose and objectives of the study, as well as to confirm how the methods used make it possible to assess the adequacy of the conclusions given in the article.

3. It is necessary to increase the clarity of the inscription in the legend in Figure 1, or increase the font size (the inscription is almost unreadable)

4. In table 9, you need to change the formatting of the first row (in the last two columns, the line break is incorrect)

5. The authors argue that the proposed empirical results provide a basis for decision making by government agencies, financial institutions, and transport management agencies. However, it is not clear how they can be applied in practice. In our opinion, it would be correct to give possible options for the practical application of the results obtained.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer , thank you very much for your suggestions. We have made specific modifications according to your suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript can be accepted in current form.