Assessing the Impact of Government Behavior on Regional High-Quality Development: A Case of Fiscal Expenditures on People’s Livelihoods in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

General opinion: the improvement in the correction is visible, but some extra issues must be consider to include in the text. The article still requires changes conceptually and methodologically.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have made carefully revisions based on your suggestions and look forward to receiving your approval.

 

1. the conceptualization of the article and the research undertaken is still unclear.

In the Introduction section, please describe in detail the issues raised in the article in the form of specific research questions: what problem you want to solve, what question you want to answer and how and with what methods you want to measure it. See and verify lines 81-88 - describe according to the title of the article -where is mentioned the sustainable development? This is unclear in the current version.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have improved and added to the introduction. At the same time, we correct the formulation of the marginal contribution of our manuscript.

The three-year-long COVID-19 epidemic has brought about far-reaching economic and social impacts [], including technological innovation, medical education, and ecological environment. This has made the world's economies pay more attention to the high-quality development of the economy and society in the post-COVID era. high-quality development is a multi-level concept that emphasizes the dynamic balance of economic, social and environmental aspects within a region [], which is an important manifestation of the high-quality development of a region in a period of economic transition. Countries continue to improve the evaluation system of high-quality development by updating the evaluation of development goals to correct the inappropriate direction of economic development in the past, including the evaluation system of the "New Economy" in the United States [], the evaluation system of high-quality development in the EU [], and the German National Welfare Assessment System [], which provides a strong guarantee for the realization of the UN 2030 high-quality development Goals. The Chinese government has developed high-quality development programs through learning and policy implementation, and in 2017 introduced the concept of "high-quality development" to emphasize its commitment to advancing sustainable practices. Obviously, in China, high-quality development is the mode, structure, and dynamics of economic development that better meets the real and growing needs of its people []. And how to promote the quality of regional development so as to realize sustainable economic and social development is a key issue of current concern, which can effectively address the difficulties and challenges faced by economic transformation in the post-COVID era.

Research on the factors influencing the high-quality development of regional economies has become the focus of academic discussions. Existing studies have mainly explored the impact on high-quality development from the aspects of the political environment [], quality of production factors [], construction of urban living environment [], green technological innovation [], trade activities [], and development of digital economy [], which have been analyzed in depth from the perspective of market operation. The government, as the strategic planner of the high-quality development of the regional economy, the leader of the modernization development path and the builder of the foreign trade system, plays an important role in the improvement of the quality of regional development [29]. Some scholars have explored the impact of government policy support on high-quality economic development. Ma et al. (2023) explored and verified the mechanism through which the Chinese government promotes the high-quality development of the marine economy through policy support []. Han et al. (2023) also argued that the study of economic growth rate with the aim of the high-quality development Goals (SDGs) has become an important issue in the world, and scholars have analyzed high-quality development of the economy (HED) from multiple perspectives. analyzed the influencing factors of high-quality economic development (HED), but there is little research on green finance (GF) and high-quality economic development (HED). Therefore the authors examine the logical link between green finance and high-quality economic development. The study points out that sounder government governance can promote green finance development and thus high-quality economic development []. It is clear that an effective "can-do" government can play an important role in high-quality economic development in times of economic transition. However, could government fiscal support necessarily promote high-quality regional economic development? This question is debatable. Some scholars have pointed out that when local governments are given greater financial autonomy, their fiscal spending preferences are different, and thus there are differences in the impact on the quality of regional development, which is caused by the government's short-term pursuit of interests and speculation []. And during the epidemic period, people's livelihood areas such as healthcare and education were severely hit, is this the reason for the stagnation of regional economic development? This is something that needs to be verified. In the post-epidemic era, should the government increase fiscal support in areas that can significantly expand tax revenues or should it increase fiscal expenditures on livelihoods? This requires empirical findings and astute decision-making skills on the part of policymakers, as their aim is to promote high-quality economic and social development, thereby realizing high-quality development in line with the United Nations 2030 goals.

The existing studies have extensively examined the influence of government actions on regional development, including environmental institutions, technological innovations, human capital, and fiscal support, but there are fewer studies discussing whether governments can influence regional economic development through livelihoods-based financial expenditures. Wang et al. (2022) [] explored the nonlinear impact of fiscal decentralization on regional development from the perspective of livelihood expenditures, expanding the economic high-quality development effects of government livelihood support behaviors. However, it does not analyze how livelihood fiscal expenditure affects regional economic development, which provides a foundation for research in this area with the possibility of continuing in-depth research. In light of the challenges exposed by insufficient livelihood infrastructure development during global uncertainties such as the pandemic, this study extends the current literature by focusing on fiscal public expenditure for livelihood enhancement. On the basis of the TOPSIS-Entropy Method, this paper constructs an evaluation indicator that closely conforms to the denotation and requirements of high-quality development and then carries out empirical regressions in combination with government expenditure on people's livelihood to verify the theoretical hypothesis, whose transmission mechanism and moderating effect are further empirically tested. This study highlights that an increase in government public expenditure directed towards improving people's livelihoods contributes positively to high-quality development. A significant mechanism driving this effect operates through the regional consumption level, while urbanization serves to amplify the constructive impact of government actions.

And this study’s marginal contribution includes three aspects. First, we establish a comprehensive assessment framework for gauging regional high-quality development based on the new development concept, and evaluate and analyze the level of regional high-quality development. This approach could give a more holistic definition of the high-quality developmental status. Second, we enhance the literature on government behavior's influence on high-quality development by introducing a distinctive entry point—the allocation of funds to livelihood improvement. Through theoretical analysis and empirical tests, we verify the conclusion that the government's fiscal support for people's livelihood can improve the quality of regional development. Third, we verify that the government could promote the consumption level of regional residents by supporting the local livelihood construction, thus promoting the high-quality development of the region. This paper enriches the research on the impact of government behavior on the high quality and sustainable development of regional economies.

The other parts of the manuscript are designed as follows. The second part is the theoretical analysis and research hypotheses, where we provide a logical analysis of the paper's research themes and mechanisms. The third part is the research design, where we introduce the analytical model involved in this paper and explain the relevant variables. The fourth part is the empirical analysis and testing. The fifth part is the conclusion. And the sixth part is the limitations and future research directions.

 

2. Article is focusing strict on China's socio-economic space.

For this reason is necessary to highlight this in the main text, title, conclusions, theoretical background and other crucial place - that the total conception of this article refers to China. This is important for readers from another different countries than China.

Otherwise, the conclusions could be falsely perceived and generalized, and yet they were not empirically verified in other countries, only on the example of China. It must be clear to the Reader.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have emphasized China as the object of study in the manuscript.

 

3. Line 51-55:

Please consider and ensure, if the phrase refers to indicators of regional innovative system or to the regional development - they are crucial differences between it. In the following parts, the author writes rather about the (sustainable) development process, so please check the text to make sure it is clearly understood by the reader in the whole article.

Next, notice please, the citations seems to be a bit poor. Please add extra publications which refers to selected factors, even in Europe.

Phrase "recently" in my opinion this is citation since 2020 (2013 is a bit to old) - please make the time of publications more appropriate.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have updated some of the references in time for the introduction section and the theoretical analysis section.

 

4. Line 56 and next in part 2 of the article:

Notice, in the text from line 56 and next authors refers to China's economy (not total to the global economy) - what I have mentioned in previous comment. Please precise it.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have carefully revised the contents of the introduction. We have also paid more attention to emphasizing China as the object of study in the presentation. As shown on pages 1-3 of the manuscript.

 

 

5. Part 2. Theoretical analysis and research hypothesis - lack of coherence between the title and the theoretical basis and empirical research.

There is no consistency in this section of the article (to line 170 and next). This part of the article is mixed: lines 117-170 concern theoretical considerations, although the grounding in the theory of regional development is very weak, and from line 170 it concerns China's real policy. Note the section title: "theoretical aspects".

 I still believe, that the theoretical overview in the context of regional development is very weak and requires thorough grounding in regional development theory.

World literature is extensive, perhaps it is worth matching it to China's real policy in this area.

 

 

Theoretical analysis and research hypothesis

Ensuring the provision of essential public services stands as a pivotal driver in fostering both economic and social advancement []. The government, by anchoring responsibilities in domains such as housing, education, healthcare, elderly care, and employment, lays the foundation for cultivating an ecosystem conducive to high-quality development. The government wields the capacity to elevate regional culture, education standards, and coordination mechanisms while also proactively incubating nascent demand markets—a collective endeavor that profoundly propels the trajectory of high-quality development and culminates in the establishment of a thriving well-being economy. On the supply side, public services addressing people's livelihoods manifest as potent enhancers of human capital quality and actual income levels for residents. This vitalizes a more equitable resource allocation, catalyzes a fertile milieu for innovation, amplifies developmental synchronization, and augments resource-sharing dynamics, collectively forging a robust underpinning for regional high-quality development. On the demand side, the present developmental juncture exhibits pronounced inclinations toward public consumption domains, notably education, healthcare, and elderly care. Fueled by the impetus of sustainable demand, effectively fostering the genesis of a substantial public consumption sphere becomes pivotal for harnessing the full spectrum of the government's public functions. Nurturing this realm requires reinforcing foundational livelihood security, elevating the caliber of education initiatives, enacting employment incentivization strategies, intensifying research and development within medical services, bolstering investments in public transportation, and fostering a steady maturation of the social security apparatus [][][][][]. These concerted actions collectively orchestrate the enhancement of economic operational efficacy, thereby begetting a virtuous cycle that steadily nurtures high-quality development within each locale. In line with this, the present study delves into education, medical care, social security, and employment, dissecting their roles as core components, to meticulously unravel the nuanced impact of livelihood expenditure on regional high-quality development. Through a combination of theoretical scrutiny and empirical analysis, this study substantiates the pivotal position of government-led livelihood endeavors in galvanizing and sustaining regional high-quality development.

Augmenting investment in people's well-being is pivotal for enhancing service quality in the post-COVID era. The allocation towards people's welfare markedly influences human capital development [], labor productivity, and regional innovation dynamism, consequently propelling regional high-quality development. According to endogenous growth theory, technological advancements serve as the driving force behind continual economic progress. In the face of resource constraints, the government adeptly furnishes an array of public services, encompassing education, healthcare, and employment. This strategy, by bolstering human capital standards, ensuring resident well-being and health, bolstering employment stability, and fortifying fundamental livelihood security [], effectively elevates regional innovation, coordination, and collaborative synergies, thereby instigating sustainable regional progress.

Moreover, augmenting investment in people's well-being constitutes a potent mechanism for advancing regional wealth equalization and optimizing the allocation efficiency of public resources. Mitigating internal developmental disparities can notably amplify regional coordination, thereby elevating the degree of sustainable regional progress. From the vantage point of income redistribution, the government can astutely modulate the reharmonization of real income and wealth through adept utilization of public policy instruments, encompassing fiscal revenue, expenditures, transfer payments, and related measures, particularly in cases of initial imbalance []. This approach ensures societal equity, fostering inclusive prosperity. Heightened investment in well-being services yields judicious resource allocation, efficaciously alleviating discrepancies in the primary distribution of livelihood security resources across regions and ultimately propelling high-quality development via ameliorated levels of sharing and coordinated growth in the region.

In the post-COVID era, the realization of high-quality development will require continued improvement in the quality of social security and people's livelihoods. Seven of the main indicators for economic and social development in the Chinese Government's Fourteenth Five-Year Plan relate to people's livelihoods and well-being, accounting for more than one third of the total, including education, medical care, employment, pensions, childcare and many other aspects, and the construction of a soft system centered on people's livelihoods services has become an important area of concern for economic and social development. In addition, the theory of public behavior and the governmental investment regulations promulgated by China in 2019 underscore the imperative for local administrations to establish a public-values-oriented expenditure framework. This entails transitioning towards an implicit and sustainable mode of governmental coordination, effectively advancing sustained, wholesome, and enduring economic and social development. Constituting an integral facet of governmental spending endeavors, the advancement of public welfare has consistently remained a focal point. The core objective driving government agencies' performance of their public duties is the enhancement of residents' living standards. However, due to disparities in economic development stages and levels across various regions and timeframes, local governments invariably accord diverse degrees of significance to both efficiency and equity. Consequently, this engenders divergent priorities in the development of livelihood infrastructure. Distinctions emerge in the caliber and significance of infrastructure development for public welfare services across different eras and locales characterized by varying levels of progress. Hence, the impact of heightened expenditure on public well-being on the sustenance of regional development may exhibit spatiotemporal heterogeneity. Accordingly, we propose the following hypothesis: 

Hypothesis 1a: The growth of government spending on people's livelihoods can push forward sustainable regional development.

Hypothesis 1b: The impact of government people's livelihood expenditure growth on sustainable regional development has temporal and spatial heterogeneity.

The augmentation of expenditures on public welfare fosters a sustained foundation of social security for residents, catalyzing an amplification in their tangible income and curbing the incentive to amass savings. This dynamic enhancement in disposable income not only bolsters individual consumption capacity and willingness but also galvanizes the activation of latent demand, effectively cultivating an expansive domestic circulation paradigm. Rooted in life cycle theory, the present spending behavior of a rational individual hinges upon their holistic life income and wealth, with an inherent desire for fiscal stability across their lifetime. This theoretical framework elucidates the enigma of the "Chinese savings puzzle" [][], asserting a shared propensity for precautionary savings among rational consumers. When the government elevates the spectrum of essential public services, notably education, healthcare, and social security, individuals experience proportionate reductions in outlays, leading to a pronounced abatement in precautionary savings. Consequently, their effective income escalates, stimulating consumption propensities and motivations, thereby elevating both the proportion of spending directed towards elevating living standards and overall expenditures. By accentuating the demand-side impact, this progression in supply quality instigates an amelioration in regional conditions, thus propelling sustainable regional development. In summary, we further propose the second hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: The growth of government people's livelihood expenditure can improve residents' consumption levels, thereby promoting sustainable regional development.

Marx's theory of urban and rural development is a rigorous theoretical system, using the scientific methods of dialectical materialism and historical materialism to analyze the state of development and future direction of the city and the countryside under the conditions of capitalism in terms of the contradictory movements of the productive forces and the relations of production []. Marx astutely observed that modern history unfolds as a narrative of rural‒urban transition []. In its narrower connotation, urbanization signifies the inexorable trajectory of persistent populace clustering within urban centers, an indispensable phase in a nation's economic evolution. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, the urbanization rate of China's resident population and household population is 63.89% and 45.4% respectively, which is still in the stage of rapid development of 30% to 70% according to the law of development of urbanization in the world. However, scant research has illuminated the intricate interplay between livelihood expenditure and the prospects of regional high-quality development within the context of urbanization. This study seeks to illuminate this unexplored terrain by distilling insights from pertinent scholarship.

Regarding direct repercussions, the course of urbanization exercises a direct influence on the caliber of regional development [][]. Some scholars posit that urbanization can act as a catalyst for regional economic advancement. Urbanization, through avenues such as employment generation [], the concentration of physical and human resources [], the optimization and enhancement of industrial structure [], and the fostering of domestic demand and consumption [], is anticipated to propel productivity advancement. These measures can also improve regional total factor productivity, thereby effectively achieving regional high-quality development. It is worth noting that the problems brought about by urbanization will impede high-quality development in each area. Urban isomorphism is accompanied by the advancement of urbanization. The blind expansion of the urban scale due to the one-sided pursuit of GDP growth may lead to problems in the allocation of land resources, thus constraining regional development quality. Meanwhile, industrial development and population agglomeration induced by urbanization may affect the regional environment and inhibit regional green growth [].

Concerning its indirect ramifications, within the ambit of factor inputs, the amalgamation of production factors precipitated by urbanization amplifies the impact of fundamental inputs on the well-being of residents by enhancing the efficiency of resource utilization in basic infrastructure development. Urbanization serves as a catalyst for population concentration, thereby accentuating the insufficiencies in local livelihood services. This, in turn, heightens the burden on the government to provide essential livelihood services, thereby causing a lag in the development of livelihood infrastructure. Consequently, the augmentation of regional development quality is impeded, necessitating a comprehensive enhancement of both the caliber and extent of people's livelihood expenditure. In the trajectory of investing in livelihood infrastructure, owing to the population agglomeration dynamics resulting from urbanization, the economic and societal externalities engendered by the development of people's livelihood infrastructure can be more effectively harnessed. This is evidenced by the observable manifestation wherein urbanization accentuates the role of livelihood construction in steering regional high-quality development. In light of these considerations, we advance the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 3a: Urbanization acts as a catalyst to push forward sustainable regional development.

Hypothesis 3b: There is blindness in urbanization, which inhibits sustainable regional development.

Hypothesis 4: Accelerating the urbanization process can enhance the positive externality of livelihood expenditure on regional high-quality development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. Add extra section

Since the reader of the journal Land extends widely beyond the region of China, it is necessary to familiarize him/her with the situation in this country in the article in the described scope (the subject matter). Please complete the additional section in the article containing the  characteristics of the situation in China according to the entries contained in the keywords, providing more statistical data from recent years - what is the situation in China? What is this development? This is necessary for a better understanding of the research undertaken by the author in the article.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have added relevant content in the Introduction and Theoretical Analysis section.

 

 

7. Ensure, order and Keep the same name of: sustainable regional development - like the title of this article sounds.

Variously used names: regional development, sustainable development, high-quality development - what is the subject of research? Please clarify this and apply it uniformly throughout the text.

f.eg. table 1. high quality development and point 3.2.1. Indicators of regional high-quality development level but inside the text authors write about sustainable development.

However, if the authors write about sustainable development, then the research concept should be considered, because the verified issues, areas expressing the essence of development, need to be supplemented with sustainability issues, i.e.: society - economy - environment - please clearly show that, in accordance with the title of the article, the research concept concerns sustainable development.

In my opinion, the authors do not fully understand (or they don't distinguish ) the essence of sustainable development and confuse it with the concept of regional development, which is why the theoretical background section is chaotic.

 

Thank you for your comment. We are exploring issues related to regional sustainable development with China as the research object. As introduced in the introduction, the evaluation system of China's regional high-quality development is a sustainable development in line with the current development situation in China.

“Countries continue to improve the evaluation system of sustainable development by updating the evaluation of development goals to correct the inappropriate direction of economic development in the past, including the evaluation system of the "New Economy" in the United States [], the evaluation system of high-quality development in the EU [], and the German National Welfare Assessment System [], which provides a strong guarantee for the realization of the UN 2030 high-quality development Goals. The Chinese government has developed high-quality development programs through learning and policy implementation, and in 2017 introduced the concept of "high-quality development" to emphasize its commitment to advancing sustainable practices.” As you have pointed out the problem, we have identified the indiscriminate use of proper nouns in the manuscript, and we have been interested in highlighting the theme of high-quality development and harmonizing the presentation in the manuscript.

 

 

8. Formulate your conclusions correctly and answer the research questions, which should be included in the Introduction section, adequate to the correctly described concept and research assumptions in this section - this requires improvement.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have revised the content of the conclusion section.

 

Upholding the principles of people-centred development and ensuring the well-being of individuals represent the fundamental intent and ultimate aspiration of sustainable regional development. On the basis of constructing a high-quality development evaluation system, this paper utilizes the TOPSIS-entropy method to gauge the quality of development across 30 administrative provinces in China between 2006 and 2018, and empirically examines the impact of government expenditure on people's livelihood on regional high-quality development, based on the quality of livelihood-based infrastructure and services. Based on this, it effectively explores the mediating effect of regional consumption level, and analyzes the change of the marginal effect of enhancing the government's livelihood-type expenditures on regional high-quality development in light of the development process of China's urbanization. Based on the analysis of the manuscript, the main conclusions of this paper are as follows: First, the level of high-quality development in various regions shows a more obvious ladder-type characteristic, and there is the problem that the overall quality of development is not high and the regional development is not balanced. Second, the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihoods can promote the high-quality development of the region, and there is a spatial-temporal difference in the impact of the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihoods on the high-quality development of the region. Third, the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihood can stimulate the improvement of regional consumption level, promote the formation of regional internal circulation market, and then promote regional high-quality development. Fourth, the promotion of urbanization can effectively promote regional high-quality development, and can effectively enhance the positive effect of the improvement of the level of expenditure on people's livelihood on regional high-quality development.

These findings hold significant implications for policies aimed at fostering enduring and high-quality development. First, governmental strategies should be centered on prioritizing fundamental livelihood infrastructure, meticulously tailored to the evolving economic stages and underlying laws. This necessitates augmented financial allocations towards education, healthcare, social security, and employment services, thereby amplifying their caliber and fostering an environment conducive to sustainable regional progress. Notably, local administrations must underscore the affirmative impact of livelihood expenditure across disparate developmental contexts, necessitating the formulation and execution of targeted policies to fortify and elevate living standards within the eastern, central, and western regions of the nation. Second, for the enhancement of regional economic structures and developmental quality, governmental focus should pivot towards elevating residents' consumption tendencies and nurturing novel consumption paradigms. Local authorities must endeavor to bolster actual income levels while concurrently curbing precautionary savings. This can be achieved through dynamic initiatives that bolster employment opportunities, refine social security provisions, and strategically align the contours of fundamental old-age insurance with national aspirations. Concurrently, guiding residents to elevate consumption quality, recalibrate consumption patterns, and foster innovative consumption modalities will culminate in the establishment of a robust internal market, thus galvanizing regional development in a sustainable manner. Third, expedited adoption of new-generation urbanization is pivotal for optimizing resource utilization efficiency through judicious population agglomeration. An acute awareness of the fortifying impact of population concentration during urbanization on the advancement of regional sustainability via government-backed livelihood expenditures is imperative for local governments. Furthermore, crafting an enabling milieu for livelihood enhancement should serve as a pivotal lever to elevate the efficiency and caliber of governmental services. This confluence will not only engender an augmented sense of well-being during population agglomeration but also accentuate the overall quality of government services, thereby orchestrating a harmonized and sustainable trajectory for regional development.

Limitations and future research directions

While this study provides valuable insights into the impact of livelihood expenditure on high-quality development, it is essential to acknowledge our inherent limitation in controlling for unobservable heterogeneity across regional and sectoral dimensions. Furthermore, the country-level focus of our analysis, while informative, constrains a more comprehensive and nuanced examination achievable through cross-country data. Such data would enable a profound exploration encompassing distinct economic development stages and diverse social characteristics. An avenue ripe for further investigation revolves around the exploration of cross-regional spatial spillovers engendered by livelihood expenditure, encompassing phenomena such as migration and capital mobility. Indeed, the infrastructure of livelihood significantly influences residents' well-being and life satisfaction, thereby intricately shaping migration decisions. This demographic flux further cascades into alterations in local market scale. Considering the pivotal role of market dimensions and demand potential in steering enterprise production layouts, such dynamics can potentially induce cross-regional capital reallocations, thereby warranting diligent inquiry.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The scientific relevance of the article is doubtful. Why write an article about the indicators of sustainable development when there are so many already? The research does not specify what is the innovativeness or why the world of research and of policy needs this article. What is more, there are many concepts in the research which even make one question the knowledge of the authors on sustainable development itself, which is associated with concepts like growth and consumption without problematizing how the current development paradigm has, in facts, stimulated unsustainable growth and unsustainable consumption patterns. 

The premises of the study, moreover, are vague and it is unclear what the research question is. The viewpoint is unclear (is the central government we are talking about? the regional one?) and while five dimensions of sustainability are said to be introduced in their evaluation (p. 1), on p. 2 several stances of what well-being for citizens is are presented, which however appear as mere examples and not as a systematic framework review of citizen well-being in sustainable development literature.

Terms such as regional development, sustainable development and growth are treated as interchangeable, without truly illustrating how these dimensions are related to each other (they are definitely not interchangeable). This is also reflected in the way the literature is dealt with: it deals, in fact, not just with sustainable development but with a vague literature on growth and territorial development. (Also, I appreciate the Marx quote; however, it is a bit out of touch if not contextualized in critical theory or anchored in other relevant references).

The research question investigating the investments on people's livelihood is of interest to the readers and entails interesting reflections regarding the Chinese context, also with reference to urban-rural divide and spatial heterogeneity. However, the conclusions that urbanization is per se a panacea and a beneficial driving force for sustainable development is contrasted by much literature focused on land use, on air quality, on people's own well-being in depressed and marginalized districts, and so forth. These conclusions seem rushed, if not naive. The association between growth and government spending for people's wellbeing, too, should be tested against other variables.

Major revisions should ultimately concern the state of the art and the literature, focusing more intensely on relevant literature on sustainable development or reframing the research so that it better matches the research question. Conclusions on urbanization and on people's wellbeing should be moderated by the need for further research.

English is quite good, but requires some editing.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. After carefully reading and studying your comments and suggestions, we had a thorough discussion.

First, we have harmonized the formulation in the manuscript and agreed on the nomenclature as regional high-quality development. This is due to the Chinese government's strategy for high-quality development in China, which will be developed in line with the United Principality's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

We are exploring issues related to regional sustainable development with China as the research object. As introduced in the introduction, the evaluation system of China's regional high-quality development is a sustainable development in line with the current development situation in China.

“Countries continue to improve the evaluation system of sustainable development by updating the evaluation of development goals to correct the inappropriate direction of economic development in the past, including the evaluation system of the "New Economy" in the United States [], the evaluation system of high-quality development in the EU [], and the German National Welfare Assessment System [], which provides a strong guarantee for the realization of the UN 2030 high-quality development Goals. The Chinese government has developed high-quality development programs through learning and policy implementation, and in 2017 introduced the concept of "high-quality development" to emphasize its commitment to advancing sustainable practices.” As you have pointed out the problem, we have identified the indiscriminate use of proper nouns in the manuscript, and we have been interested in highlighting the theme of high-quality development and harmonizing the presentation in the manuscript.

 

Second, we carefully revised the introductory section of the manuscript with the aim of being able to better formulate the question.

The three-year-long COVID-19 epidemic has brought about far-reaching economic and social impacts [], including technological innovation, medical education, and ecological environment. This has made the world's economies pay more attention to the high-quality development of the economy and society in the post-COVID era. high-quality development is a multi-level concept that emphasizes the dynamic balance of economic, social and environmental aspects within a region [], which is an important manifestation of the high-quality development of a region in a period of economic transition. Countries continue to improve the evaluation system of high-quality development by updating the evaluation of development goals to correct the inappropriate direction of economic development in the past, including the evaluation system of the "New Economy" in the United States [], the evaluation system of high-quality development in the EU [], and the German National Welfare Assessment System [], which provides a strong guarantee for the realization of the UN 2030 high-quality development Goals. The Chinese government has developed high-quality development programs through learning and policy implementation, and in 2017 introduced the concept of "high-quality development" to emphasize its commitment to advancing sustainable practices. Obviously, in China, high-quality development is the mode, structure, and dynamics of economic development that better meets the real and growing needs of its people []. And how to promote the quality of regional development so as to realize sustainable economic and social development is a key issue of current concern, which can effectively address the difficulties and challenges faced by economic transformation in the post-COVID era.

Research on the factors influencing the high-quality development of regional economies has become the focus of academic discussions. Existing studies have mainly explored the impact on high-quality development from the aspects of the political environment [], quality of production factors [], construction of urban living environment [], green technological innovation [], trade activities [], and development of digital economy [], which have been analyzed in depth from the perspective of market operation. The government, as the strategic planner of the high-quality development of the regional economy, the leader of the modernization development path and the builder of the foreign trade system, plays an important role in the improvement of the quality of regional development [29]. Some scholars have explored the impact of government policy support on high-quality economic development. Ma et al. (2023) explored and verified the mechanism through which the Chinese government promotes the high-quality development of the marine economy through policy support []. Han et al. (2023) also argued that the study of economic growth rate with the aim of the high-quality development Goals (SDGs) has become an important issue in the world, and scholars have analyzed high-quality development of the economy (HED) from multiple perspectives. analyzed the influencing factors of high-quality economic development (HED), but there is little research on green finance (GF) and high-quality economic development (HED). Therefore the authors examine the logical link between green finance and high-quality economic development. The study points out that sounder government governance can promote green finance development and thus high-quality economic development []. It is clear that an effective "can-do" government can play an important role in high-quality economic development in times of economic transition. However, could government fiscal support necessarily promote high-quality regional economic development? This question is debatable. Some scholars have pointed out that when local governments are given greater financial autonomy, their fiscal spending preferences are different, and thus there are differences in the impact on the quality of regional development, which is caused by the government's short-term pursuit of interests and speculation []. And during the epidemic period, people's livelihood areas such as healthcare and education were severely hit, is this the reason for the stagnation of regional economic development? This is something that needs to be verified. In the post-epidemic era, should the government increase fiscal support in areas that can significantly expand tax revenues or should it increase fiscal expenditures on livelihoods? This requires empirical findings and astute decision-making skills on the part of policymakers, as their aim is to promote high-quality economic and social development, thereby realizing high-quality development in line with the United Nations 2030 goals.

The existing studies have extensively examined the influence of government actions on regional development, including environmental institutions, technological innovations, human capital, and fiscal support, but there are fewer studies discussing whether governments can influence regional economic development through livelihoods-based financial expenditures. Wang et al. (2022) [] explored the nonlinear impact of fiscal decentralization on regional development from the perspective of livelihood expenditures, expanding the economic high-quality development effects of government livelihood support behaviors. However, it does not analyze how livelihood fiscal expenditure affects regional economic development, which provides a foundation for research in this area with the possibility of continuing in-depth research. In light of the challenges exposed by insufficient livelihood infrastructure development during global uncertainties such as the pandemic, this study extends the current literature by focusing on fiscal public expenditure for livelihood enhancement. On the basis of the TOPSIS-Entropy Method, this paper constructs an evaluation indicator that closely conforms to the denotation and requirements of high-quality development and then carries out empirical regressions in combination with government expenditure on people's livelihood to verify the theoretical hypothesis, whose transmission mechanism and moderating effect are further empirically tested. This study highlights that an increase in government public expenditure directed towards improving people's livelihoods contributes positively to high-quality development. A significant mechanism driving this effect operates through the regional consumption level, while urbanization serves to amplify the constructive impact of government actions.

And this study’s marginal contribution includes three aspects. First, we establish a comprehensive assessment framework for gauging regional high-quality development based on the new development concept, and evaluate and analyze the level of regional high-quality development. This approach could give a more holistic definition of the high-quality developmental status. Second, we enhance the literature on government behavior's influence on high-quality development by introducing a distinctive entry point—the allocation of funds to livelihood improvement. Through theoretical analysis and empirical tests, we verify the conclusion that the government's fiscal support for people's livelihood can improve the quality of regional development. Third, we verify that the government could promote the consumption level of regional residents by supporting the local livelihood construction, thus promoting the high-quality development of the region. This paper enriches the research on the impact of government behavior on the high quality and sustainable development of regional economies.

The other parts of the manuscript are designed as follows. The second part is the theoretical analysis and research hypotheses, where we provide a logical analysis of the paper's research themes and mechanisms. The third part is the research design, where we introduce the analytical model involved in this paper and explain the relevant variables. The fourth part is the empirical analysis and testing. The fifth part is the conclusion. And the sixth part is the limitations and future research directions.

 

Third, we revised the Conclusions and Implications section of the manuscript and emphasized its Limitations and future research directions.

 

Conclusions and Implications

Upholding the principles of people-centred development and ensuring the well-being of individuals represent the fundamental intent and ultimate aspiration of sustainable regional development. On the basis of constructing a high-quality development evaluation system, this paper utilizes the TOPSIS-entropy method to gauge the quality of development across 30 administrative provinces in China between 2006 and 2018, and empirically examines the impact of government expenditure on people's livelihood on regional high-quality development, based on the quality of livelihood-based infrastructure and services. Based on this, it effectively explores the mediating effect of regional consumption level, and analyzes the change of the marginal effect of enhancing the government's livelihood-type expenditures on regional high-quality development in light of the development process of China's urbanization. Based on the analysis of the manuscript, the main conclusions of this paper are as follows: First, the level of high-quality development in various regions shows a more obvious ladder-type characteristic, and there is the problem that the overall quality of development is not high and the regional development is not balanced. Second, the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihoods can promote the high-quality development of the region, and there is a spatial-temporal difference in the impact of the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihoods on the high-quality development of the region. Third, the increase in government expenditure on people's livelihood can stimulate the improvement of regional consumption level, promote the formation of regional internal circulation market, and then promote regional high-quality development. Fourth, the promotion of urbanization can effectively promote regional high-quality development, and can effectively enhance the positive effect of the improvement of the level of expenditure on people's livelihood on regional high-quality development.

These findings hold significant implications for policies aimed at fostering enduring and high-quality development. First, governmental strategies should be centered on prioritizing fundamental livelihood infrastructure, meticulously tailored to the evolving economic stages and underlying laws. This necessitates augmented financial allocations towards education, healthcare, social security, and employment services, thereby amplifying their caliber and fostering an environment conducive to sustainable regional progress. Notably, local administrations must underscore the affirmative impact of livelihood expenditure across disparate developmental contexts, necessitating the formulation and execution of targeted policies to fortify and elevate living standards within the eastern, central, and western regions of the nation. Second, for the enhancement of regional economic structures and developmental quality, governmental focus should pivot towards elevating residents' consumption tendencies and nurturing novel consumption paradigms. Local authorities must endeavor to bolster actual income levels while concurrently curbing precautionary savings. This can be achieved through dynamic initiatives that bolster employment opportunities, refine social security provisions, and strategically align the contours of fundamental old-age insurance with national aspirations. Concurrently, guiding residents to elevate consumption quality, recalibrate consumption patterns, and foster innovative consumption modalities will culminate in the establishment of a robust internal market, thus galvanizing regional development in a sustainable manner. Third, expedited adoption of new-generation urbanization is pivotal for optimizing resource utilization efficiency through judicious population agglomeration. An acute awareness of the fortifying impact of population concentration during urbanization on the advancement of regional sustainability via government-backed livelihood expenditures is imperative for local governments. Furthermore, crafting an enabling milieu for livelihood enhancement should serve as a pivotal lever to elevate the efficiency and caliber of governmental services. This confluence will not only engender an augmented sense of well-being during population agglomeration but also accentuate the overall quality of government services, thereby orchestrating a harmonized and sustainable trajectory for regional development.

Limitations and future research directions

While this study provides valuable insights into the impact of livelihood expenditure on high-quality development, it is essential to acknowledge our inherent limitation in controlling for unobservable heterogeneity across regional and sectoral dimensions. Furthermore, the country-level focus of our analysis, while informative, constrains a more comprehensive and nuanced examination achievable through cross-country data. Such data would enable a profound exploration encompassing distinct economic development stages and diverse social characteristics. An avenue ripe for further investigation revolves around the exploration of cross-regional spatial spillovers engendered by livelihood expenditure, encompassing phenomena such as migration and capital mobility. Indeed, the infrastructure of livelihood significantly influences residents' well-being and life satisfaction, thereby intricately shaping migration decisions. This demographic flux further cascades into alterations in local market scale. Considering the pivotal role of market dimensions and demand potential in steering enterprise production layouts, such dynamics can potentially induce cross-regional capital reallocations, thereby warranting diligent inquiry.

In addition, we further improved the language of the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

       This is an interesting and interesting study. The author uses medium and macro statistical data to explore Fiscal Expenditures on People's Livelihoods. In general, the research topic has certain significance, the research design is reasonable, and the method is solid. Some suggestions are for reference:

       (1) The key scientific questions to be addressed in the introduction are suggested to be further clarified. At the same time, the marginal contribution of the whole research is somewhat fragmentary, so it is suggested to further summarize it.

       (2) The theoretical analysis section suggests further research. At the same time, it is suggested to draw a map of the mechanism of variable action and mark the research hypothesis on it to help readers better understand the logic of the interaction between variables.

       (3) It is suggested to mark the name of the province on the figure 1-figure 6, so that readers can better understand the information conveyed by the map.

       (4) It is suggested to add a discussion section to systematically compare the similarities and differences between this study and similar studies, and point out the reasons for the differences. At the same time, the shortcomings of this study and the future direction of further research are briefly expounded.

Author Response

This is an interesting and interesting study. The author uses medium and macro statistical data to explore Fiscal Expenditures on People's Livelihoods. In general, the research topic has certain significance, the research design is reasonable, and the method is solid. Some suggestions are for reference:

 

Thank you for your comments. We appreciate that you were able to take the time to review our manuscript, and we have made changes to the content of the manuscript based on your suggestions.

 

(1) The key scientific questions to be addressed in the introduction are suggested to be further clarified. At the same time, the marginal contribution of the whole research is somewhat fragmentary, so it is suggested to further summarize it.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have improved and added to the introduction. At the same time, we correct the formulation of the marginal contribution of our manuscript.

The three-year-long COVID-19 epidemic has brought about far-reaching economic and social impacts [], including technological innovation, medical education, and ecological environment. This has made the world's economies pay more attention to the high-quality development of the economy and society in the post-COVID era. high-quality development is a multi-level concept that emphasizes the dynamic balance of economic, social and environmental aspects within a region [], which is an important manifestation of the high-quality development of a region in a period of economic transition. Countries continue to improve the evaluation system of high-quality development by updating the evaluation of development goals to correct the inappropriate direction of economic development in the past, including the evaluation system of the "New Economy" in the United States [], the evaluation system of high-quality development in the EU [], and the German National Welfare Assessment System [], which provides a strong guarantee for the realization of the UN 2030 high-quality development Goals. The Chinese government has developed high-quality development programs through learning and policy implementation, and in 2017 introduced the concept of "high-quality development" to emphasize its commitment to advancing sustainable practices. Obviously, in China, high-quality development is the mode, structure, and dynamics of economic development that better meets the real and growing needs of its people []. And how to promote the quality of regional development so as to realize sustainable economic and social development is a key issue of current concern, which can effectively address the difficulties and challenges faced by economic transformation in the post-COVID era.

Research on the factors influencing the high-quality development of regional economies has become the focus of academic discussions. Existing studies have mainly explored the impact on high-quality development from the aspects of the political environment [], quality of production factors [], construction of urban living environment [], green technological innovation [], trade activities [], and development of digital economy [], which have been analyzed in depth from the perspective of market operation. The government, as the strategic planner of the high-quality development of the regional economy, the leader of the modernization development path and the builder of the foreign trade system, plays an important role in the improvement of the quality of regional development [29]. Some scholars have explored the impact of government policy support on high-quality economic development. Ma et al. (2023) explored and verified the mechanism through which the Chinese government promotes the high-quality development of the marine economy through policy support []. Han et al. (2023) also argued that the study of economic growth rate with the aim of the high-quality development Goals (SDGs) has become an important issue in the world, and scholars have analyzed high-quality development of the economy (HED) from multiple perspectives. analyzed the influencing factors of high-quality economic development (HED), but there is little research on green finance (GF) and high-quality economic development (HED). Therefore the authors examine the logical link between green finance and high-quality economic development. The study points out that sounder government governance can promote green finance development and thus high-quality economic development []. It is clear that an effective "can-do" government can play an important role in high-quality economic development in times of economic transition. However, could government fiscal support necessarily promote high-quality regional economic development? This question is debatable. Some scholars have pointed out that when local governments are given greater financial autonomy, their fiscal spending preferences are different, and thus there are differences in the impact on the quality of regional development, which is caused by the government's short-term pursuit of interests and speculation []. And during the epidemic period, people's livelihood areas such as healthcare and education were severely hit, is this the reason for the stagnation of regional economic development? This is something that needs to be verified. In the post-epidemic era, should the government increase fiscal support in areas that can significantly expand tax revenues or should it increase fiscal expenditures on livelihoods? This requires empirical findings and astute decision-making skills on the part of policymakers, as their aim is to promote high-quality economic and social development, thereby realizing high-quality development in line with the United Nations 2030 goals.

The existing studies have extensively examined the influence of government actions on regional development, including environmental institutions, technological innovations, human capital, and fiscal support, but there are fewer studies discussing whether governments can influence regional economic development through livelihoods-based financial expenditures. Wang et al. (2022) [] explored the nonlinear impact of fiscal decentralization on regional development from the perspective of livelihood expenditures, expanding the economic high-quality development effects of government livelihood support behaviors. However, it does not analyze how livelihood fiscal expenditure affects regional economic development, which provides a foundation for research in this area with the possibility of continuing in-depth research. In light of the challenges exposed by insufficient livelihood infrastructure development during global uncertainties such as the pandemic, this study extends the current literature by focusing on fiscal public expenditure for livelihood enhancement. On the basis of the TOPSIS-Entropy Method, this paper constructs an evaluation indicator that closely conforms to the denotation and requirements of high-quality development and then carries out empirical regressions in combination with government expenditure on people's livelihood to verify the theoretical hypothesis, whose transmission mechanism and moderating effect are further empirically tested. This study highlights that an increase in government public expenditure directed towards improving people's livelihoods contributes positively to high-quality development. A significant mechanism driving this effect operates through the regional consumption level, while urbanization serves to amplify the constructive impact of government actions.

And this study’s marginal contribution includes three aspects. First, we establish a comprehensive assessment framework for gauging regional high-quality development based on the new development concept, and evaluate and analyze the level of regional high-quality development. This approach could give a more holistic definition of the high-quality developmental status. Second, we enhance the literature on government behavior's influence on high-quality development by introducing a distinctive entry point—the allocation of funds to livelihood improvement. Through theoretical analysis and empirical tests, we verify the conclusion that the government's fiscal support for people's livelihood can improve the quality of regional development. Third, we verify that the government could promote the consumption level of regional residents by supporting the local livelihood construction, thus promoting the high-quality development of the region. This paper enriches the research on the impact of government behavior on the high quality and sustainable development of regional economies.

 

(2) The theoretical analysis section suggests further research. At the same time, it is suggested to draw a map of the mechanism of variable action and mark the research hypothesis on it to help readers better understand the logic of the interaction between variables.

 

Thank you for your comments. We have added the mechanism of action diagram for the conduction mechanism.

 

Figure 1: The mechanism of transmission

 

(3) It is suggested to mark the name of the province on the figure 1-figure 6, so that readers can better understand the information conveyed by the map.

 

Thank you for your comments. We found that adding provinces to the map may make the map information mixed, which is not conducive to information transfer. Therefore, we took the same form of expression as in other studies and did not represent the names of regions in the maps.

 

(4) It is suggested to add a discussion section to systematically compare the similarities and differences between this study and similar studies, and point out the reasons for the differences. At the same time, the shortcomings of this study and the future direction of further research are briefly expounded.

 

Thanks for your comments. We separately the limitations and future research directions of this study as Part 6.

Limitations and future research directions

While this study provides valuable insights into the impact of livelihood expenditure on sustainable development, it is essential to acknowledge our inherent limitation in controlling for unobservable heterogeneity across regional and sectoral dimensions. Furthermore, the country-level focus of our analysis, while informative, constrains a more comprehensive and nuanced examination achievable through cross-country data. Such data would enable a profound exploration encompassing distinct economic development stages and diverse social characteristics. An avenue ripe for further investigation revolves around the exploration of cross-regional spatial spillovers engendered by livelihood expenditure, encompassing phenomena such as migration and capital mobility. Indeed, the infrastructure of livelihood significantly influences residents' well-being and life satisfaction, thereby intricately shaping migration decisions. This demographic flux further cascades into alterations in local market scale. Considering the pivotal role of market dimensions and demand potential in steering enterprise production layouts, such dynamics can potentially induce cross-regional capital reallocations, thereby warranting diligent inquiry.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, thank you for the response. A final comment to consider: there is no typical discussion in this article. The research results were discussed correctly and this part of the article probably also contained elements of discussion. Nevertheless, an additional and separate Discussion section would be a valuable contribution to the article.

Reviewer 2 Report

The research still bears some of the limitations I highlihted during my first review. However, I deem it relevant, scientifically, and believe it is ready for publication. I still recommend being more thoughtful when elaborating a theoretical framework next time.

English is fine.