The Influence of New-Type Urbanization and Environmental Pollution on Public Health: A Spatial Durbin Model Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find comments in attached file. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English needs to be improved. Especially the clarification. Most of the sentences are too long and quite difficult to follow. 

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper uses a spatial Durbin model and a mediating effects model，to study the relationship between new urbanization, environmental pollution and public health from both local and spatial perspectives. However, I have several concerns about the construction and workload of the paper. The detailed comments are as follows:

 

1. Note the 292-line and 278-line formula formatting, and the full-text formula format is recommended for alignment.

2. The results section of sections 4.2 and 4.4 can be supported or compared with the results of some other researchers.

3. The discussion in Part 5 could be refined.

4. The structure of the article can be appropriately simplified, for example, parts 5 and 6 can be combined.

5. It is recommended to cite more papers in the past five years, such as：

1)     The changing PM2.5 dynamics of global megacities based on long-term remotely sensed observation. Environment International, 2020.

2)     The dynamics of cardiovascular and respiratory deaths attributed to long-term PM2.5 exposures in global megacities. Science of the Total Environment, 2022.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article aims to clarify the relationship between new urbanization, environmental pollution and public health from both local and spatial perspectives, using a spatial Durbin model and a mediating effects model. This topic is very interesting and meaningful. But I think there are still some issues with the research process.

 

1) The research background is not sufficient to demonstrate the necessity and significance of this study. It is recommended that the author add more references in the introduction section instead of listing policies and provide a more detailed and accurate explanation of where the gap in current research is and why this study is being conducted. In addition, it is also necessary to explain what distinguishes China's new city development from previous or other countries.

 

2) The author should provide more sufficient reasons for how the variable was selected.

 

3) The Moran index in 2017 was higher than 1, which is different from other years. Suggest the author to analyze the outliers of this year.

 

4) The study divides China into three parts for analysis: East, Central, and West. Please supplement the significance and necessity of zoning research.

 

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript investigates the local and spatial relationships between urbanization, environmental pollution and public health in China using ten years of prefecture-level data and applying spacial and mediating effects models. The manuscript is well written and the results are supported by a detailed presentation of the employed methodologies. However, the manuscript could be accepted only after the authors clarified some points and made some corrections to the text.

 

Please refer to the following comments:

 

Lines 61-78: Please provide additional details on the concept of “new-type urbanization”. A definition and one or two examples would be very useful for the readers to better understand this concept.

Line 99: please define the acronym “EKC”.

Lines 197-210: Please define what you mean by “per-capita wastewater emissions”. Is it the per-capita mass (or volume) flow of wastewater regardless of its level of pollution? Or is it referred to a specific pollutant? Depending on the water consumption in dwellings, for instance, wastewater could be more or less diluted. This means that, if the indicator is limited to the mass or volume flow of wastewater and does not include an indication on the level of pollution, the indicator would not be appropriate to describe “environmental pollution”. Please justify your assumptions and, in case, consider the need for a different indicator concerning wastewater.

Line 296: Please define “LM”.

Lines 335-336 and 349-350: Please check the syntax of these sentences.

Lines 604-607 and 641: Are you sure that the impacts of climate change on specific regions of China are originated by the urbanization that takes place in those regions? Climate change is a global problem. Although specific regions of China may contribute to climate change, its potential effects cannot be ascribed entirely to those regions.

Lines 619-625: This sentence is very long and, perhaps also due to wrong syntax, difficult to follow. Please rephrase it.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The overall quality of English is good. However, the authors should carefully read again their paper to clarify unclear sentences in the manuscript (please refer to my previous comments). In addition, the manuscript contains some typos that the authors should correct.

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The investigation on the relationship between New-Type Urbanization and Environmental Pollution on Public Health makes a significant contribution to the understanding of this complex issue. The study sheds light on the negative impact of rapid urbanization on the environment, and subsequently, on human health. It also provides valuable insights into the various ways in which environmental pollution can affect public health, such as through air pollution, water contamination, and exposure to hazardous waste. The findings highlight the urgent need for sustainable urban development and effective environmental policies to mitigate the adverse health effects of urbanization. The findings will be instrumental in raising awareness among policymakers and the general public about the importance of addressing environmental pollution as a crucial public health concern in the context of New-Type Urbanization.

 

Best regards,

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Journal: Sustainability

Title: Influence Mechanism of New-Type Urbanization and Environmental Pollution on Public Health: A Spatial Durbin Model Study Based on 275 Prefecture-Level Cities in China

Comments: Urbanization is a double-edged sword, which provides benefits to citizens, and induces environmental pollutions at the same time, posing threat on public health. Hence, this study estimated the relationships among new-type urbanization, environmental pollution, and public health using the panel data of 275 cities in China from 2011 to 2020. The impactors including local effect and spatial spillover effects were considered. The results indicated the positive U-shape relationship between urbanization and public health covering local and spillover effects in whole of China. Meanwhile, the significant heterogeneity between the east and central China was found in this study. The study design is valid, the analysis is sufficient, and the results are explicit. There are some comments for the presentations of the results, and the discussion:

(1)  Abstract section: The absolute values for the results of the model were missing. For example, the relationship between urbanization and public health mediating by environmental pollutions was significant in positive U-shape. However, the coefficient and the associated p-value was not shown, which will confuse the readers. Hence, please add the values.

(2)  Introduction section: 2.3: The impact of environmental pollution on public health contributes to many pollutants including PM2.5, SO2, and NO2. However, the specific pollutants were not analyzed in this study, which would markedly restrict the efficiency of the results. Please explain why?

(3)  Table1: There were many indicators was negative, and please add the potential reasons.

(4)  Line 370: The authors showed the data from 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020 considering the space limitation, which might be too random. Please detailedly explain the representativeness of the data from the four time points.

(5)  Table 4 and 5: Based on the values in the two tables, its hard for readers to find the trend as positive U-shape or inverted U-shape. Its better to show the figure of the trajectory of the values derived from the model analysis.

(6)  Discussion: There numerous values (e.g., coefficients and indicators) in the results section, but there was no associated discussion about the implications of those values. Please add the corresponding discussion.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of english language of this manuscript is good.

Author Response

please refer to the attachment~

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks for the effort. All my comments have been replied and revised.