Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Based on Geographical Detector, this paper treats an essential topic in Spatial-Temporal Evolution and Influencing Factors of China's High-Tech Industry GDP, revealing the authors' endeavor. However, some modifications are still necessary to enhance its academic value.

 

1. Although the research method is mainly based on the Geographical Detector, the discussion and exploration of the concept of economic growth, which correspondingly with sustainability development, should not be ignored. Authors should include and conduct related literature reviews with reliable and valuable references in another section.

 

2. Besides presenting the distributional phenomenon of Chinese High-Tech GDP from a macro perspective, authors should provide more significant conclusions to correspond with the research objectives to explore the causes behind this phenomenon and give viable recommendations for sustainability in High-Tech industries.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Can be improved	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Must be improved	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Can be improved	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on pages 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Must be improved	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Must be improved	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Yes/Can be improved/Must be improved/Not applicable	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:Although the research method is mainly based on the Geographical Detector, the discussion and exploration of the concept of economic growth, which correspondingly with sustainability development, should not be ignored. Authors should include and conduct related literature reviews with reliable and valuable references in another section.

 

Response 1：Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment. In the introduction section of my article, I have discussed concepts related to sustainable economic growth, the current state of high-tech industry development in a global context, and the necessity for China to develop its high-tech industries. The modifications and references to the latest relevant literature can be found in lines 29 to 58.

 

Comments 2：Besides presenting the distributional phenomenon of Chinese High-Tech GDP from a macro perspective, authors should provide more significant conclusions to correspond with the research objectives to explore the causes behind this phenomenon and give viable recommendations for sustainability in High-Tech industries.

 

Response 1：Thank you for pointing this out; it highlights areas where my research could be improved. I have attempted to discuss the reasons behind the distribution phenomena of the high-tech industry as thoroughly as possible in Section 5.1 and the conclusion. Following your suggestion, I have conducted a preliminary exploration of the fluctuations in the growth of the high-tech industry in lines 267-272 and discussed the reasons for the provincial distribution over time in lines 284-286. As for the geographical distribution differences in the high-tech industry, I have addressed this in lines 428-447. Due to time constraints, my efforts may not have been perfect. If you feel that my modifications do not meet the objective, please feel free to contact me. I am willing to read more references and materials to further revise this section.

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper analyses the evolution of China’s high-tech industries in and their relationship with GDP.

Though the motivation for the study, methods and writing are acceptable, the presentation is messy which significantly damages the document. The following issues need to be addressed in the paper:

-          The title could be more appealing. I suggest at least to remove the reference to the time span from the title.

-          The paper focus on high-tech industries but lacks a clear definition of what those industries are. Despite mentioning that “existing research exhibits ambiguity in the concept of high-tech industries", the paper does not do better to provide clarity on this issue.

-          The references in the text are not according to major referencing styles and should be revised.

-          The methodology section deserves a major revision. Several variables in the equations are not defined, notation is not ok in some cases or should be adjusted and equations should be numbered. Besides there is confusion in some terms presented. Some examples: wij in line 116 corresponds to an element of a matrix and not the matrix itself; the variables specified in lines 158-159 are confusing (is X2 a dependent variable?).

-          Tables and figures. There are tables and figures not properly commented in text, or the comment appears after the figure/table, which is incorrect.

-          In Table 1, what is the relation between Index and Type. E.g., is X1 the only variable belonging to the Innovation Type?

-          The content in Table 2 is unclear. E.g., what is the criterium to define a non-linear reduction? No comments on this table exist in the text. The same applies to Table 4.

-          Awkward writing appears in lines 321-326. This needs a revision.

-          Some paragraphs start with enumerations, but the text does not indicate a motive and the meaning for these enumerations.

-          The reasoning for the policy recommendations in the conclusions needs a better presentation.

-          The authors indicate that “there's more development in the east than the west, and more in the south than the north”, but in their suggestions they emphasize that the government should focus on “central and western regions” instead of northern and western regions. This requires a rewriting.

-          The paper lacks the limitations and suggestions for future research.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I recommend a proofreading of the English to correct some minor typos.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Must be improved	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Must be improved	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Must be improved	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on lines 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Can be improved	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Must be improved	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Can be improved	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:The title could be more appealing. I suggest at least to remove the reference to the time span from the title.

 

Response 1：Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment.I have removed the time span from the title and revised it to”Spatiotemporal Evolution and the Influencing Factors of China’s High-Tech Industry GDP using a Geographical Detector”

 

Comments 2：The paper focus on high-tech industries but lacks a clear definition of what those industries are. Despite mentioning that “existing research exhibits ambiguity in the concept of high-tech industries", the paper does not do better to provide clarity on this issue.

 

Response 2: Thank you for highlighting the inadequacies in my article regarding this aspect. I have revised the introduction section to include a discussion on the concept of high-tech industries. You can find this modification specifically from lines 132 to 139 in the revised draft. If you have any objections to this section, I hope you can contact me, and I will earnestly make the necessary amendments.

 

Comments 3: The references in the text are not according to major referencing styles and should be revised.

 

Response 4：Thank you for pointing out the deficiencies in my article in this regard. Regarding the content of the references, I have supplemented the introduction section to ensure that the references are relevant to the research content of the article. As for the formatting of the references, I have referred to MDPI's guidelines on reference formatting and made the necessary corrections.

 

Comments 4：The methodology section deserves a major revision. Several variables in the equations are not defined, notation is not ok in some cases or should be adjusted and equations should be numbered. Besides there is confusion in some terms presented. Some examples: wij in line 116 corresponds to an element of a matrix and not the matrix itself; the variables specified in lines 158-159 are confusing (is X2 a dependent variable?).

 

Response 1：Thank you for highlighting the issues in the methodology section of my paper. I apologize for any oversight on my part. I have made every effort to define the symbols used in the equations based on the references, and I have numbered each equation accordingly. I have also revised the terminology for clarity, which you can review in lines 174-195 of the article. Additionally, due to language barriers, there may have been unintended errors in my English expression of the equations, and I apologize again for any carelessness. If there are still any confusing aspects or if the modifications to the methodology section do not meet expectations, please do not hesitate to point them out. I will read the relevant literature more carefully and make the necessary amendments.

 

Comments 5：Tables and figures. There are tables and figures not properly commented in text, or the comment appears after the figure/table, which is incorrect.

 

Response 5：Thank you very much for pointing out my mistakes on the chart. As for the notes on the chart, I have revised them by referring to the journal requirements of MDPI.

 

Comments 5：In Table 1, what is the relation between Index and Type. E.g., is X1 the only variable belonging to the Innovation Type?

 

Response 5：I apologize for the oversight in my manuscript. I should have clarified this aspect in the methodology section. "Type" refers to the primary indicator, while "Index" denotes the secondary indicator included under each "Type". Regarding this matter, I have revised the table to ensure clear readability. Thank you for your understanding and patience.

 

Comments 6：The content in Table 2 is unclear. E.g., what is the criterium to define a non-linear reduction? No comments on this table exist in the text. The same applies to Table

 

Response 6：I am deeply grateful for your suggestion. Although the references did not provide detailed explanations for the types in the interaction detector, based on the formula and conclusions drawn from other references, I have interpreted the types in the interaction detector as follows:

1.Non-linear reduction: the interaction between factors X and Y, results in a non-linear reduction. In other words, their combined effect is less than the sum of their individual effects.

2.Single factor non-linear reduction:One factor experiences a non-linear reduction in its influence, positively affecting the weaker factor but negatively impacting the stronger one.

3.Bi-factor enhancement:  The interaction between two factors enhances both, where the combined effect on the dependent variable is stronger than the individual explanatory power of each factor.

4.Independent: Factors X and Y are independent of each other, indicating no interaction or influence between them.

5.Non-linear enhancement: The interaction between factors X and Y leads to a non-linear enhancement, where their combined explanatory power is greater than the simple sum of their individual powers.

     I have revised it in lines 225-239 of the article.

 

Comments 7：Awkward writing appears in lines 321-326. This needs a revision.

 

Response 7：Yes, I also found this problem, thank you very much for pointing out the deficiency. According to this problem, we put the missing Data in "2.1. Data Sources" in the article for explanation, specifically in lines 168-169.

 

Comments 8：Some paragraphs start with enumerations, but the text does not indicate a motive and the meaning for these enumerations.

 

Response 8：Thank you for pointing this out，I have explained the motivation and summarized the list in the context of each paragraph. I hope you can be satisfied with this modification. If there is any insufficiency, I will make some deficiencies.

 

Comments 9：The reasoning for the policy recommendations in the conclusions needs a better presentation.

 

Response 9：Thank you for pointing this out; it highlights areas where my research could be improved. I have rewritten the expression of the conclusion, hoping to have a better expression. The specific content is in lines 483-598 of the paper. If you have any better suggestions, please be sure to contact me, and I will rewrite the conclusion to achieve a higher academic level.

 

Comments 10：The authors indicate that “there's more development in the east than the west, and more in the south than the north”, but in their suggestions they emphasize that the government should focus on “central and western regions” instead of northern and western regions. This requires a rewriting.

 

Response 10：Thank you very much for pointing out the wrong part in the article, and I am really sorry. I noticed that I forgot to add the discussion about "North-South difference" before, and I apologize again for my carelessness. I have discussed this part in line 547-569 of 6.2, please review it.

 

 Comments 11：The paper lacks the limitations and suggestions for future research.

 

Response 11：Thank you very much for pointing out the deficiencies in the conclusion of the article. As for the deficiencies of the article and the future research direction, I have made a supplement, the specific content is in lines 485-508.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In recent years, several publications have explored China´s high tech industry trying to shed light on its transformation into a global tech leader. As the authors highlight, science, technology and innovation are the main drivers of economic development. China´s achievement in this field is undeniable, so it is necessary and useful to understand the Chinese tech world.

However, enhancing the innovation capability of the sector is a continuous challenge and government’s policies play important roles in the development of technological innovation. In this way, the pertinence and the relevance of this article is high.

Overall, I consider that the article is well structured and that the findings are meaningful and interesting. References are also appropriate. Moreover, the figures and tables included are relevant and helpful to make the reading easier. The authors contribute to the research literature in this area of investigation, and it may be considered as an interesting topic for further research.

Finally, I always recommend to clearly define who this article is addressed to, from a stakeholder perspective.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Yes	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Yes	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on lines 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Yes	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Yes	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Yes	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:In recent years, several publications have explored China´s high tech industry trying to shed light on its transformation into a global tech leader. As the authors highlight, science, technology and innovation are the main drivers of economic development. China´s achievement in this field is undeniable, so it is necessary and useful to understand the Chinese tech world.

 

However, enhancing the innovation capability of the sector is a continuous challenge and government’s policies play important roles in the development of technological innovation. In this way, the pertinence and the relevance of this article is high.

 

Overall, I consider that the article is well structured and that the findings are meaningful and interesting. References are also appropriate. Moreover, the figures and tables included are relevant and helpful to make the reading easier. The authors contribute to the research literature in this area of investigation, and it may be considered as an interesting topic for further research.

 

Finally, I always recommend to clearly define who this article is addressed to, from a stakeholder perspective..

 

Response 1：truly motivating for me. After carefully reviewing the manuscript, I realized that the corroboration with reference literature needed strengthening. Therefore, I have added supplementary information to this part. Additionally, I have expanded section 6.1 to include a discussion on the limitations of this study and suggestions for future research directions. I hope you can review my article again in light of these additions.

 

I am immensely grateful for the time you have taken from your busy schedule to read my manuscript. I am committed to continually improving my work and aspire to achieve higher standards in my academic endeavors.

 

 4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please refer to the attached report. I urge you to incorporate all the points I raised in detail.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Only minor spelling issues need to be fixed.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

 

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Can be improved	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Must be improved	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Yes	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on lines 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Yes	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Must be improved	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Can be improved	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:Monetary expansions. The sample period comprises the onset and evolution of the Global Financial Crisis,the Eurozone debt crisis, and the COVID–19 pandemic, In response to such crises, several central banks engaged in monetary policy expansions (Cortes et al., 2022; Hartley et al., 2021). The massive injection of liquidity by central banks of developed economies keep real interest rates artificially low and generate abnormal capital flows to emerging market such as China (Cortes et al., 2022; Todorov, 2020). Hence, given the dominance of the US monetary policy (Dedola et al., 2020), I encourage the authors to consider the size of the US Fed’s balance sheet as a potential explanatory factor (Cortes et al., 2022, see Figure 1 of). Data can be found at https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WALCL

The period in question is characterized by a sharp increase in economic policy uncertainty and geopolitical instability (Bloom, 2009; Campello et al., 2022). It is well known that uncertainty undermines reversible investments in capital and labor but increases the value of real-options-like projects (Campello et al., 2022;Campello and Kankanhalli, 2022). Hence, I encourage the authors to discuss the effects of uncertainty,precisely because innovative technology investments are more likely to have the real-options component dominating the negative effects of uncertainty. The authors should consider the global policy uncertainty

index as an explanatory factor. Data can be found at https://www.policyuncertainty.com/

global_monthly.html.

 

Response 1：Thank you very much for your detailed advice. The references you provided are of great help to me. Based on your suggestions, I am deeply aware that my article is not sufficiently discussed in the global macroeconomic context. Regarding monetary expansion, I discuss in the introduction section of the article as follows:

Since the economic reforms, China has experienced significant growth. However, this growth did not occur in isolation, but rather against the backdrop of global macroeconomic conditions, including the expansion of monetary policies by developed economies and rising global policy uncertainty. After the 2008 global financial crisis, central banks in the United States, Europe, and other developed economies implemented unprecedented quantitative easing policies. These policies maintained low global interest rates, significantly influencing global capital flows and investment decisions, especially impacting emerging economies like China[1,2]. Additionally, international political–economic turbulence, including uncertainties in trade policies and geopolitical conflicts, has introduced unpredictability to long-term investment and innovation activities for businesses [3].

And Part 3.1:This growth was influenced by global macroeconomic trends, particularly  global financial crisis. Central banks in developed economies, notably the US and Europe, implemented unprecedented quantitative easing, impacting global capital flows and investment decisions[41]. The expansive monetary policies, especially the US Federal Reserve's balance sheet expansion, significantly affected emerging economies like China, indirectly influencing the pace and nature of its high-tech industry growth.

 

 

Comments 2：Given the importance of the spatial component in this paper, the authors should have done a better job connecting their findings with the relevant literature in spatial economics. For example, it is worth noting that the growth in technology GDP is clustered in regions with large Chinese cities. Could it be the case that the technology sector is benefitting from economies of scale or the infrastructure in place? Please refer to Ellison and Glaeser (1997), Ellison et al. (2010), Greenstone et al. (2010), and Kim (2020).

 

Response 2: Thank you for highlighting the inadequacies in my article regarding this aspect.I discussed this issue in the space section of 5.1, as follows ：This matches the high-correlation economic activity and technological innovation indicators in the model, leading to rapid growth in the high-tech industry GDP in these regions. This phenomenon echoes the research of Ellison and Glaeser [43], as well as Ellison, Glaeser, and Kerr[44], who explored the causes of industry agglomeration and the impact of economies of scale on industry development. Particularly in the technology sector, economies of scale and existing infrastructure likely support the rapid development of these regions. This explains why the economic activities in the eastern and southern regions are more prosperous and their technological innovation capabilities are more prominent, thereby driving the rapid growth of the high-tech industry GDP. In contrast, the western and central regions are relatively lagging due to their poor performance in these key indicators, limiting the development of their high-tech industry GDP. This trend suggests that the prosperity of economic activities and advancements in technological innovation are primary drivers of high-tech GDP growth to a certain extent. Furthermore, although the correlations of some indicators fluctuated over different years, they generally maintained a consistent trend across periods.

 

Comments 3：The comma after “detector” in the title is incorrect (not needed).

 

Response 3：Thank you very much for your suggestion, I have changed the title to“Spatiotemporal Evolution and the Influencing Factors of China’s High-Tech Industry GDP using a Geographical Detector”

 

Comments 4：Also, please include a fifth column in Table 3 with the percent growth rate of China’s total GDP so the reader can more clearly compare with the high-tech GDP growth.

 

Response 4：Thank you very much for pointing out my mistakes on the chart. I have added the data on the total GDP growth rate in the table

Years		High-Tech GDP (Billion Yuan)	High-Tech GDP Growth Rate	Total GDP (Billion Yuan)	Total GDP  Growth Rate
2007	95,911.5		33.5%	270,092.3	0.18
2008	96,546.2		0.7%	319,244.6	0.09
2009	93,319.1		-3.4%	348,517.7	0.18
2010	119,022		27.5%	412,119.3	0.18
2011	140,338.9		17.9%	487,940.2	0.10
2012	152,235.3		8.5%	538,580	0.10
2013	175,106.4		15.0%	592,963.2	0.09
2014	211,335.9		20.7%	643,563.1	0.07
2015	189,757.5		-10.2%	688,858.2	0.08
2016	212,268.8		11.9%	746,395.1	0.11
2017	243,898		14.9%	832,035.9	0.10
2018	288,706.3		18.4%	919,281.1	0.07
2019	324,137.4		12.3%	986,515.2	0.03
2020	367,111.6		13.3%	1,015,986.2	0.13
2021	478,489.1		30.3%	1,149,237	0.18

 

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General Concept Comments:

The article presents a comprehensive analysis of China's high-tech industry and offers policy recommendations for its continued growth. It successfully identifies key driving factors, particularly the correlation between R&D investment, practitioners, operating revenue, and high-tech industry GDP. This highlights the article's strong focus on research and data analysis. However, there are some areas for improvement.

1. The article could benefit from more recent references to ensure the relevance of the data and findings.

2. Additionally, while it acknowledges regional disparities, the article could delve deeper into the specific challenges faced by different regions within China and propose tailored solutions.

3. Consider addressing potential limitations, such as data biases, in the

methodology section.

 

Review Comments

● Under Section 2 About the Discussion of Spatial Autocorrelation and

Geodetector:

1: Provide a more detailed explanation of what spatial autocorrelation is and how it relates to the Geodetector analysis.2: Explain how spatial autocorrelation measures can be integrated into the Geodetector framework. Describe how these measures can be used as input variables or covariates in Geodetector modeling to improve the analysis. 3: Include case studies or practical examples where spatial autocorrelation and Geodetector are applied together. This can help illustrate the practical relevance of combining these methods and provide a step-by-step guide for researchers.

● Line 417: When discussing regional disparities in high-tech industry development, elaborate on the potential consequences of these disparities, such as economic inequality and resource allocation challenges.

● Under Section 6 Conclusion: Emphasize the critical role of innovation in achieving industrial upgrading. Explain how strengthening R&D, promoting technology transfer, and encouraging collaboration between enterprises and research institutions can drive innovation.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Required minor editing.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 5 Comments

 

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Can be improved	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Can be improved	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on lines 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Can be improved	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Yes	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Can be improved	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:The article could benefit from more recent references to ensure the relevance of the data and findings.

 

Response 1：Thank you very much for your thoughtful review of my article! Based on your suggestions, I have updated the 1. Introduction section of my manuscript with the latest references. I hope you can review it again at your convenience. I greatly appreciate your guidance and the time you've dedicated to helping improve my work.Thank you once again!

 

Comments 2：Additionally, while it acknowledges regional disparities, the article could delve deeper into the specific challenges faced by different regions within China and propose tailored solutions.

 

Response 2：Thank you very much for your suggestion, which exactly addresses what my article lacks. Following your guidance, I have conducted a preliminary analysis of the different problems faced by regions in section 6.1 of the article and proposed customized recommendations in section 6.2. For details, please see lines 483-589 of the article. Due to time constraints for revision, I was unable to collect more detailed data for an in-depth discussion, so I only conducted a basic discussion and analysis. I hope you can forgive the limitations of my work. If you have any better ideas or suggestions, please contact me and I will make the necessary modifications as soon as possible.

 

Comments 3：Consider addressing potential limitations, such as data biases, in the methodology section.

 

Response 3：Thank you very much for reviewing the methodology section of my article. Taking into account data biases, I have re-checked the data and made some revisions to the expression of the equations in the methodology section. For more details, please refer to lines 174-239 of the article.

 

Comments 4：Under Section 2 About the Discussion of Spatial Autocorrelation and Geodetector:

1: Provide a more detailed explanation of what spatial autocorrelation is and how it relates to the Geodetector analysis.2: Explain how spatial autocorrelation measures can be integrated into the Geodetector framework. Describe how these measures can be used as input variables or covariates in Geodetector modeling to improve the analysis. 3: Include case studies or practical examples where spatial autocorrelation and Geodetector are applied together. This can help illustrate the practical relevance of combining these methods and provide a step-by-step guide for researchers.

 

Response 4：Your insightful suggestions are invaluable, and I realize this is an aspect I had not fully considered. Consequently, I have thoroughly listed the relevant references on the combined use of spatial autocorrelation and the geographical detector in the introduction section of my article. Additionally, I have elaborated on spatial autocorrelation and explained the interaction detection part of the geographical detector in more detail, which can be found in lines 107-118 and 225-239 of the article. I must also apologize, as due to my limitations and time constraints, I have not found instances in the literature where spatial autocorrelation is used as a covariate in the geographical detector. I deeply regret this oversight. However, spatial autocorrelation significantly supports the results obtained through the geographical detector, greatly aiding in the formulation of the conclusions in my article, for which I am grateful to you!

 

Comments 5：Line 417: When discussing regional disparities in high-tech industry development, elaborate on the potential consequences of these disparities, such as economic inequality and resource allocation challenges.

 

Response 5：Thank you very much for your suggestions, which have greatly enriched the details of my paper. I admit I hadn't fully considered the issue of unequal resource allocation in my article, and I will address this in detail in sections 6.1 and 6.2. If there are any shortcomings or omissions, please do not hesitate to contact me, and I will make the necessary revisions with great care.

 

Comments 6：Under Section 6 Conclusion: Emphasize the critical role of innovation in achieving industrial upgrading. Explain how strengthening R&D, promoting technology transfer, and encouraging collaboration between enterprises and research institutions can drive innovation.

 

Response 6：I am also grateful for your valuable input regarding the conclusion of my paper. Indeed, I had not sufficiently discussed the crucial role of innovation in industrial upgrading, as well as the ways to strengthen R&D, promote technology transfer, and encourage collaboration between enterprises and research institutions. Following your advice, I have revised sections 6.2 and 6.3 to reflect these aspects more thoroughly. I hope you find these revisions satisfactory.

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 6 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article provides empirical evidence on a specific phenomenon concerning the spatial allocation of high-tech industries in China and its relation on economic development. 
It would be beneficial if the authors clarify the following:
1) The nature of the indicator "Practitioners" (or, number of practitioners) - what does this mean? Who is practicing what? The general understanding could be that any kind of laborer is "practicing" some kind of job, even a low-skilled one.
2) On many places we read D&R - if this is R&D (Research & Development), then the correct notation must be applied throughout the whole paper.

One technical issue - the charts need to be enlarged (in order to improve the visibility of the presented information) and allocated in the center of the page.

Author Response

For research article

Response to Reviewer 6 Comments

 

 

1. Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request,we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

 

2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Does the introduction provide sufficient background and include all relevant references?	Yes	I have described and revised the theoretical background.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	The authors realized the inadequacy of the literature review. In response to your valuable suggestions, we have added more references to the section on economic growth related to sustainable development in the introduction section of the revised draft.
Is the research design appropriate?	Yes	For the research design, I looked for relevant references in the introduction to support the views of the paper, specifically on lines 107-118.
Are the methods adequately described?	Yes	I modified the inappropriate equations in the methodology, and modified the interpretation of symbols as much as possible. The specific results of the modifications have been highlighted.
Are the results clearly presented?	Yes	I have adjusted the argument for the result, and this part has been rewritten.
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	Yes	As for the conclusion, I have adjusted and modified it and searched for literature as much as possible to support my view.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1:The nature of the indicator "Practitioners"(or, number of practitioners)-what does this mean? Who is practicing what? The general understanding could be that any kind of laborer is "practicing" some kind of job, even a low-skilled one.s.

 

Response 1：As you pointed out, I indeed overlooked this aspect. I have now added an explanation in the manuscript regarding "Practitioner" as in-service personnel of high-tech enterprises. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback!

 

Comments 2：On many places we read D&R - if this is R&D (Research & Development), then the correct notation must be applied throughout the whole paper.

 

Response 2：I sincerely apologize for my oversight and thank you for pointing it out. It is indeed R&D (Research & Development), and I have corrected this error in the manuscript.

 

Comments 3：One technical issue - the charts need to be enlarged (in order to improve the visibility of the presented information) and allocated in the center of the page.

 

Response 3：I deeply regret any inconvenience caused by the small size of the figures and tables in my paper. I have now enlarged all graphics in the document, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

Response 1: Thank you for evaluating the language of the article. I have made some minor grammatical revisions to the manuscript using MDPI's author services, hoping to enhance your reading experience.

 

5. Additional clarifications

 

I sincerely acknowledge that there are areas in my article that need improvement, and I am truly grateful for your evaluation. In the coming days, I will thoroughly consider any further modifications that may be necessary. Despite time constraints, I believe there is room for perfection in my work. I earnestly hope for your valuable suggestions, which I will contemplate carefully and incorporate into my revisions.

 

Yours sincerely

Yuan Shan

November 30, 2023

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have modified the manuscript and significantly improved the quality.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No further comments.