Reexamining the Impact of Industrial Structure on Haze Pollution Based on the Yangtze River Delta

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this study, the static and dynamic spatial Durbin model between industrial structure  and haze pollution in Yangtze River Delta is constructed to analyze and discuss the impact of  rationalization and upgrading of industrial structure on haze pollution and its spatial spillover effect.

General:

why the authors considered PM2.5 and not PM10? where does PM2.5 data come from?  and how many data do they collect for Cities? when PM2.5 monitoring started in the cities?

Introduction:  Add a table with previous studies, methods and results

Data source: add more info about the data. A table with average per cities could be useful for the comprehension of the study

Conclusion: for conclusion 3  please add more information about cities 

Recommendations: I suggest to formulate the recommendations in table to make them more clear. Also add more local  analysis considering that the pollution level and industry development is also site specific.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Reexamining the impact of industrial structure on haze pollution based on the Yangtze River Delta” (Atmosphere-1161721). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The detailed replies to the comments are shown in the attached word file.

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Corresponding author:
Professor Shumin Jiang
E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript has examined the impact of industrial structure on haze (expressed in PM2.5) pollution in Yantze River Delta using statistical modeling. The topic is interesting and the method appears sound. I consider this work can be published in the journal with minor revision, by addressing the following aspects:

1) How the findings from this analysis compare to, or are supported by, relevant studies elsewhere if any? Even some brief analysis of this kind could be of interest for international audience and highlight broad value of the work;

2) Presentation of Section 4 (Conclusions and policy recommendations) may be simplified or improved. Given detailed discussions have been given in early sections, the summary of results here can be simplified, e.g. mainly focused on the major findings and implications instead (rather list all specifics). Also, the recommendations appear a bit overpowered,  in some sense not directly supported by this research - this is true when one considers further the complexity and roles of many other factors in influencing decision making for formulating industrial structure. I suggest the whole section be revised, for example, by applying a logic flow such as of "this study found that.... this finding means that ... for example, such measures as ...  can potentially help control or reduce haze pollution ..."

Some specific comments:

1) Abstract: lines 4-9 can be improved for clarity; 

2) lines 55-57: the statement can be further qualified as effect of those factors can be one way or the other;

3) lines 378-380: rephrase the statement?

4) some abbreviations are used in text, without provision of full spelling first.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Reexamining the impact of industrial structure on haze pollution based on the Yangtze River Delta” (Atmosphere-1161721). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in red in the paper. The detailed replies to the comments are shown in the attached word file.

We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Corresponding author:
Professor Shumin Jiang
E-mail: [email protected]

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf