Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper examines the conditions under which the opening of the CRE affects GTFP. These will provide a theoretical reference point for the planning of train routes and the rational use of green industries.The following comments are for reference.

1.Further additions are needed regarding the Direct Impact of CRE on GTFP.

2.The authors could have embellished Figure 1.

3.Check the subscript writing for fixed effects, the subscript of the city  is i (not it), the subscript of the year is t (not it).

4.Why is the depreciation rate 9.6%?

5.The parallel trend test should be placed after the baseline regression, or as part of a robustness check.

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised copy of the manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on this manuscript. Your comments and concerns are highly insightful and enabled us to improve the quality of the manuscript. All revisions to the manuscript have been marked up by using tracking changes function. We hope that this revised version has satisfactorily addressed all of your concerns. Sincerely, Xiao Wang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The author explores the impact of China's GTFP from the perspective of China-Europe Railway, the perspective is innovative, and the paper structure is complete, which has certain theoretical and practical significance, but there are still the following problems:

In the part of heterogeneity analysis, the heterogeneity analysis of northern and southern cities lacks appropriate theoretical support. Moreover, there are major differences in the frequency, transportation of goods, shuttle bus types, etc., and whether these differences can meet the support for the conclusions reached is debatable.

The section of the policy-supported heterogeneity test is too far-fetched to interpret the results, and it is recommended to improve and supplement.

In the setting of the mediation model, Equation 4 is set incorrectly, and the interaction between the mediation variable and the explanatory variable should be deleted. The mediation model section recommends careful consideration, and there are errors in the model settings, resulting in inaccurate analysis later.

The reference format is not standardized, such as the 39th.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised copy of the manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on this manuscript. Your comments and concerns are highly insightful and enabled us to improve the quality of the manuscript. All revisions to the manuscript have been marked up by using tracking changes function. We hope that this revised version has satisfactorily addressed all of your concerns. Sincerely, Xiao Wang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The articles lacks sufficient literature and the literature from various angles is required to satisfy the hypothesis in the given research. The references need to be enhanced and the conclusion should inlcude the policy recommendations and way forward. 

Below are some of the articles that can be added to the study:

1.      Shafi, M., Ramos, C, S., Jain, V., Salman, A., Kamal, M., Shabbir, M, S., & Rehman, M. (February 2023) The Dynamic Relationship Between Green Tax Incentives and Environmental Protection. Environmental Science and Pollution Research Scopus IF 5.034 ISI IF 4.223 Journal indexed in Scopus (Q1) and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science and ABDC ranked A

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-023-25482-y

2.      Ramzan, M., Abbasi, K., A., Salman, A., Dagar, V., & Kagzi, M. (January 2023). Towards the Dream of Go Green: An Empirical Importance of Green Innovation and Financial Depth of Environmental Neutrality in Worlds Top 10 Greenest Economies. Technological Forecasting And Social Change Scopus IF 8.593, ISI IF 11.146  Journal indexed in Scopus (Q1) and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science and ABDC ranked A

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162523000550?dgcid=coauthor

 

 

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised copy of the manuscript. We appreciate the time and effort that you have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on this manuscript. Your comments and concerns are highly insightful and enabled us to improve the quality of the manuscript. All revisions to the manuscript have been marked up by using tracking changes function. We hope that this revised version has satisfactorily addressed all of your concerns. Sincerely, Xiao Wang

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Approved after extensive revision.

The authors has updated the references, results, methodology, discussion, literature review and references. The conclusion, although enhanced can add elements of policy recommendations.