The Unintended Consequences of Urban Community Infrastructure Investment for Consumption in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article focuses on the urban impact of infrastructure and investment for consumption in China. The study is relevant and corresponds to current issues and realities related to the concept of sustainability.

The authors need to refine the presentation of their research to make the text more understandable in terms of text organization and language.

The abstract corresponds to the content of the article. However, the workload of the first sentence does not give a clear picture of what the authors consider the main goal and what tasks allow realizing the goal gradually. Methods correspond to the stated goals. However, the "Conclusion" does not look convincing in the matter of reflecting the results of the study. The authors should detail the conclusions in accordance with the tasks and show what results they came to when solving each of the tasks. 
A substantive question arises about what the authors think about consumption and its increase. Is increased consumption always good for society? Or you can consider consumption as directed, preserving nature and culture, characterizing sustainability. 
Paragraph 2 of "Review of literature" looks somewhat incomprehensible. In fact, the literature review is intended to show the existing positions on the issue under study and give a critical assessment, and show that the study is based on certain theoretical bases but continues further work. The authors indicated only a few works without designation of general strategies, reflecting the history and current state of the issues under study. 
Moreover, paragraph 2 includes a discussion of the logic of the work. The article's logic is not a literary review; it is an introduction, partly a methodology. The article's authors should refer to the stylistic and grammatical norms of the language adopted in scientific articles.

The text is overloaded with sentences that include two to four semantic units. Therefore, the authors should pay attention to the revision of the text to create a communicative space with the reader.

I'll give examples. Of course, they do not pretend to the totality of the text's coverage and are intended to show the authors that proposals similar to the points indicated the need to be finalized. 
So, the first sentence in the abstract requires splitting into semantic units, which will make the author's intention more understandable to the reader. 
Each task should be disclosed with the designation of the results. A sentence beginning with "This paper found .." has many meanings in one sentence. At least two offers in one. Examples of grammatical errors also start with Abstract. There are many of them in the text. 
Therefore, the authors should contact a specialist in the field of academic English. Line 15: central areas, transportation (comma) and environmental protection... Line 22: ensive industries (comma) and transportation and environmental protection infrastructure... Line 24: the transformation of (need the article "the") economy from investment (write with "-") driven to innovation (write with "-") driven. And so on in the text. 

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Review of manuscript sustainability-1613730 prepared by Congliang Wu , Ning Zhang *

The manuscript r studies the consumption driving role of urban community infrastructure, discusses the causes and action mechanism of infrastructure in promoting residents' consumption, analyzes the micro-basis involving major macro-investment issues, and points out the main direction and investment focus in the future infrastructure. So the topic is actual. The goals of paper suites to Sustainability journal scope.

Abstract and keywords are correct.

A literature review is based on 21 positions. Only one from 2021 year. Thus I recommend extending the literature review with at least 5 positions from 2021-2022 year (recommendation $1).

Also please introduce a paragraph with novelty of the presented paper in section 1 introduction (recommendation $2).

When in line 151 " This paper also uses the China urban statistical yearbook to supple the index information at the urban level of the family" should be extended with detail about the yearbook info like year. Also, it would be work the referee here to this yearbook as reference. (recommendation $3)

Also please add the name of the software that was used to obtain results in sections 4 and 5 as well as 6 (recommendation $4).

Also please discuss future research directions in section 7.(recommendation $5)

 

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

cx

The authors of the article improved the text. Of course, there are some remarks that the language editor can help correct, for example, the title of the paragraph “Literature Review”, which has a different interpretation in the text. The authors improved the wording, which, as the article now shows, had the opposite meaning. Practical and scientific significance are what the study has. The methods correspond to the set goal. The authors should expand the section “Keywords”, as the article has several topics and questions, the sign of which will make the article a clearer communicative tool. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is suitable for publication after revision.