Evaluating China’s Common Prosperity Policies against the Background of Green Development by Using the PMC Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the article How to Evaluate China’s Common Prosperity Policy under the Background of Green Development: Based on PMC Model, the PMC (Policy Modeling Consistency) index model is applied by the authors to analyze 15 (selected) policies from China by point of view of suitability for the proposed purpose: common prosperity. Thus, the indicators derived from the policies are assigned a value of 1 or 0 depending on the fulfillment or non-fulfillment of the assignment criteria. The Common Prosperity Policy PMC index value is calculated as the sum of the assigned values. This method provides a picture of how policies are constructed to achieve the goal of common prosperity. On the other hand, this method does not say anything about the way of implementing the policies, the links between these policies or their synergy. Also, all policies have the same importance in achieving the proposed goal: common prosperity. However, appropriate policies are more likely to produce appropriate results. This study can be seen as a beginning in the policy analysis, but in the future the study could be completed by the results of policy implementation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
I thank my colleagues for the study, the clear and concrete structure, the understandable results and the good visualisation of them.
Undoubtedly, the measures taken for the development of society, including state and human capital development policies, deserve close attention and serious evaluations. This enables us to determine their adequacy and effectiveness and to adjust them in a timely manner. From this perspective, the work is relevant and meaningful to society. It has scientific value because it shows that it is possible to use a specific method to quantify qualitative measures.
At the same time, I have a few comments and suggestions for the paper.
1. Although the title of the manuscript, the abstract and the review address the issue of green development, the analysis and the results do not mention this topic. In this regard, I think it is appropriate to change the topic of the study, as the policies analysed are very rarely (only Y5.1, 5.2 and 5.3) related to the background of green development.
2. Revise the abstract, outlining the purpose of the study. Briefly present in the abstract what the rating of policies "excellent", "good", "bad" means (explanations can be used instead of these ratings).
3. It is unclear how the values of the indices reflecting the values of the selected policies were originally assessed. Reflect this in the manuscript.
4. Specifically show in the paper what would need to be done to increase the quantitative values of the implementability of the policies.
5. Since the results of the article are contradictory and the effectiveness of the policy has probably been discussed in China, I recommend introducing a "Discussion" section in which the results are compared with other policy assessments discussed in the manuscript..
I wish you success in your future research!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
1. Further background on the economic development of China is needed here.
2. Explain further the PMC method. Why adopt this method as compared to the others?
3. How were the selected 15 from the 40 policies were chosen?
4. Green development and shared prosperity - based on the PMC results - has this been achieved?
-
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I thank the authors for the changes made. I agree with most of the comments. However, I would first have a discussion and then draw conclusions from the whole paper. In doing so, I would broaden the discussion beyond the general theses: it is more appropriate for conclusions now.
