The Impact Factors and Spatial Spillover of Industrial Green Development: Based on Cities in the Northwest Segment of the Silk Road Economic Belt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors studied the spatial-temporal differentiation and influencing factors of industrial green development——based on the empirical test of cities in the northwest section of the Silk Road Economic Belt. Overall, this is an interesting and important topic. The paper can potentially make a valuable contribution. However, there are some minor and major concerns that the authors could give consideration based on my reading of the paper, as follows.

1.       The abstract should briefly describe this research value.

2.       The introduction section is not placed in a bigger context. The manuscript strictly focuses on the region of China. The system the authored studied should be the study system, not the main theme of the paper. Green development should be described in better details. The context provided is not sufficient for the general audience

3.       Literature Review is not systematic, just a list of previous studies, which needs to be more organized and summarized from the perspective of research timing or relevance.

4.       Indicator system construction is lack of basis. Table 1 is not clear.

5.       There is a lack of basic introduction to the research objects in the research area, and not all readers are aware of it.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

  The novelty is weak, and there are writing errors on pages 112, 317, 337,427, etc. Please check the Technical English with native spealers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

·        Abstract should not usually start with a methodological approach, ideally it reveals the purpose or central theme of the paper. The authors should state a sentence or two on the research problem and/or research gap in the area. The findings of the study should be summarized in the form of a running text to keep the articulation compact in an abstract.

·        I believe, the first paragraph (line 42-45) contains statement/arguments based on contemporary literature; however, it is evident that the authors did not put citations or references for that composition.

·        There is a quote in lines 51-53 “ General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out in the report of the Nineteenth National Congress 52 that “my country’s economy has shifted from a stage of high-speed growth to a stage of high-quality 53 development” (China Economic Net,2017)

·        I think, for the understanding of readers, the authors need to specify who the General Secretary is and from what page of the document the quote is cited

·        In line 72 the authors state that “The necessity of industrial green transformation and development is clear, …..” BUT I do not find enough literature to validate their statement or support this argument!

·  In lines 76-81 attempted to state the objective of the paper BUT it ended with a vague meaningless statement! Again, the authors stated, “based on this background and existing studies, ……..”    whereas the extent of background studies or at least references to those studies are non-existent in the introductory part of the paper.

·        I find the entire literature review mostly sporadic and does not support or address the central theme or the objective of the paper. Thus, the review is poorly written and the standard and composition of the section are not publish-worthy in the present form.

·        There needs a great deal of clarity as to how the metric layers were drawn. The interpretation of the Table 1 is largely missing. Similarly, it is not understandable as to how the variable presented in Table 2 measures industrial green development.

·        The conclusions and policy recommendations are so verbose and filled with wishful statements; they must flow from the study results, background, and context.  

 

·        Overall, I find the research covered a lot of grounds BUT it lacks focus and a clear angle. In its present form, it is largely confounded and convoluted. I would ask the authors to rewrite it with a clear focus and fluid language. The themes and objectives of the study are not coherent in the present form.   

Comments on the Quality of English Language

A thorough editing by a professional English Language editor is a must

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A sincere revision work -- appreciate it! However, I think there still minor errors and typos, and more evidently awkward and verbose expressions (with complex and compound sentences). I hope the authors can make the English simpler and correct for the potential readers.

Best,       

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I think there still minor errors and typos, and more evidently awkward and verbose expressions (with complex and compound sentences). I think the article can be accepted if the authors can make the English simpler and free of errors for the potential readers.

Author Response

Extremely grateful for our efforts to receive your recognition, we have made revisions to the English grammar in the paper under the guidance of professional English editing.