The Impact of Digital Governance on Entrepreneurial Activity in Deprived Areas: Evidence from Tibet, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFirst of all, I want to congratulate you for giving me the opportunity to read this very interesting paper. The main aim of the paper is to examine the impact of digital governance on entrepreneurial activity, using both an economic geographic model for theoretical analysis, as well as an an empirical approach using county panel data for Tibet for 22 years (2001-2021).
The paper starts with a well written introduction, which introduces the reader to the background of the study - the state of China's entrepreneurial environment and the public governance's level of digital transformation. At the same time, it provides a brief overview of the connection between digital governance and entrepreneurial activity in China. The second section of the paper "Theoretical background and the model" presents the mathematical model upon which 3 hypotheses are formulated. The next section "Methods", presents the variables as well as the empirical model. Moreover, the "Results" section presents the results of the statistical analysis, while section 5 presents the main conclusions and the recomendations.
The paper covers an interesting subject and it's well written. However, I have a few comments:
- in my opinion, in section 2 "theoretical background and the model", besides the mathematical model, you should discuss previous studies that cover similar topics and link your hypotheses with other relevant research. Maybe you can use some of the literature review that you have used in the introduction section
- in the fourth section "Results", you should clearly state if your three hypothesis have been validated. At the same time, you should include (either in this section or in a different section) a detailed discussion of your results, in which you talk about other studies that either support or do not support your findings, as well as the theoretical, practical and policy implications of your findings.
- the conclusion section is well written, but the conclusions should be based on wether your hypotheses have been validated or not, which is not clear from your paper.
Comments on the Quality of English Language- line 384 and line 403 contain a typo: "Cecommendations" probably means Recommendations
Author Response
I am truly grateful for your valuable suggestions. Thank you very much.
Comments 1: In section 2 "theoretical background and the model", besides the mathematical model, you should discuss previous studies that cover similar topics and link your hypotheses with other relevant research. Maybe you can use some of the literature review that you have used in the introduction section.
Response 1:I completely agree with this opinion.To this end, I have added some relevant studies in the theoretical background and model section, and provided a brief explanation of the actual situation of digital governance in Tibet.
Comments 2 and 3: In the fourth section "Results", you should clearly state if your three hypothesis have been validated. At the same time, you should include (either in this section or in a different section) a detailed discussion of your results, in which you talk about other studies that either support or do not support your findings, as well as the theoretical, practical and policy implications of your findings. the conclusion section is well written, but the conclusions should be based on wether your hypotheses have been validated or not, which is not clear from your paper.
Response 2 and 3: I completely agree with this opinion. Therefore, in the empirical analysis section of the article, I have emphasized the relationship between the empirical results and the hypotheses in section 2. I have also highlighted these points in the revised article.
Comments 4: line 384 and line 403 contain a typo: "Cecommendations" probably means Recommendations.
Respose 4: I completely agree with this opinion and have made the necessary revisions.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. After carefully assessing the paper, I believe it merits publication, but would benefit from some minor revisions.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for your opinion. I truly appreciate it.
Comments 1 and 2:The literature review can be enhanced by discussing several recent studies on the impact of digital governance on entrepreneurial activity in low-income countries. In the theoretical background and methods section, it would be expedient to write more clearly the relationships between the theoretical background and empirical models.
Response 1 and 2:I completely agree with this opinion. Therefore, I have strengthened my literature review section and added some literature on low-income countries. Additionally, I have included some research background in the “Theoretical Background and Model” section and incorporated the actual development of digital governance in Tibet to better analyze the advantages of using new economic geography modeling.
Commentrs 3:The formulation of the first hypothesis is incorrect. In my opinion, its proof in this version is obvious. I recommend formulating hypothesis 1 more correctly.
Response 3: Thank you very much for your opinion. I also believe that this hypothesis is somewhat inappropriate. I have revised the hypothesis to “Digital governance can enhance entrepreneurial dynamism in Tibet” for two reasons. First, no one has ever studied digital governance in Tibet, and Tibet is located on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, which has a completely different geographical environment compared to many other regions. Therefore, while the impact of digital governance on entrepreneurial activities may already be evident in many regions, it still requires empirical testing in Tibet. The second reason is that I believe the conclusion derived from this hypothesis may be relatively straightforward, but it can serve as a foundation for my subsequent empirical chapters.
Comments 4:In the conclusions, I recommend clearly writing down the relationships between the research hypotheses and the obtained results.
Response 4: Yes, I completely agree with this opinion. Therefore, in the empirical section of the article, I have focused on analyzing the relationship between the research conclusions and the hypotheses, and I have emphasized this in the conclusion section.
