Does Environmental Decentralization Affect the Supply of Urban Construction Land? Evidence from China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic is interesting and worth investigating.  However, the article requires some improvement both from the point of view of its level of academic and scientific scholarship.  Below I detail the issues that should be addressed by the authors.

In general, the manuscript presents an excessively local approach, both from an analytical point of view and from the point of view of literary revision.  This makes its interest for readers who are not from the Chinese geographical area limited, which is a major handicap for a journal with a very wide and international readership.

A broader and international review of the state of the art is missing (almost all the references are from Chinese authors).  The introduction to the problem is excessively direct and does not address why this subject is interesting from a global point of view to justify its investigation, beyond the interest it may have in China.

The article lacks a specific section for scientific discussion.  There are some sections after the results that try to emulate this question a bit, but a comparative analysis with previous studies on the subject is missing, emphasizing to what extent the study carried out corroborates, contradicts or improves the results of previous studies.  A self-critical reflection of the limitations of the proposed study is also missing, emphasizing what issues should be improved in future lines of research, etc.  all of them, questions that must be addressed in a section of traditional scientific discussion.

Lastly, this scientific discussion section should also include a comparative analysis with other international case studies that allows contextualizing the extent to which the Chinese phenomenon is relevant worldwide, citing specific cases that allow us to see to what extent it could be export the methodology used and knowledge acquired to other parts of the planet.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your important comments on this manuscript. The authors appreciate the constructive comments and technical questions provided by the reviewer. Those comments have been very helpful for the authors to improve the quality of this manuscript. The authors tried to answer the questions in this revision and improve the quality of this paper. The point-to-point responses to the comments by reviewer are listed one by one as follow:

Reviewer 1

The topic is interesting and worth investigating. However, the article requires some improvement both from the point of view of its level of academic and scientific scholarship.  Below I detail the issues that should be addressed by the authors.

 

Point 1: In general, the manuscript presents an excessively local approach, both from an analytical point of view and from the point of view of literary revision. This makes its interest for readers who are not from the Chinese geographical area limited, which is a major handicap for a journal with a very wide and international readership.

Response 1: Thanks for this comment. The analysis and language style has been improved in revision. In terms of analysis, we have referred to more international literature and noted studies on the impact of government actions on urban construction land supply in other countries. In terms of language style, we have modified and explained localized vocabulary in the hope of helping readers in other countries understand it.

 

Point 2: A broader and international review of the state of the art is missing (almost all the references are from Chinese authors). The introduction to the problem is excessively direct and does not address why this subject is interesting from a global point of view to justify its investigation, beyond the interest it may have in China.

Response 2: Thanks for this comment. We have referred to more non-Chinese literature and improved the manuscript. We have added other scholars' research on the expansion of urban construction land in other countries to the introduction. And we have compared China's case with other countries in the discussion section. The contradiction between urban construction land expansion and environmental protection is a common problem faced by countries in the process of urbanization, and the research on the impact of environmental decentralization on urban construction land supply in China can provide experience for other countries.

 

Point 3: The article lacks a specific section for scientific discussion. There are some sections after the results that try to emulate this question a bit, but a comparative analysis with previous studies on the subject is missing, emphasizing to what extent the study carried out corroborates, contradicts or improves the results of previous studies. A self-critical reflection of the limitations of the proposed study is also missing, emphasizing what issues should be improved in future lines of research, etc. all of them, questions that must be addressed in a section of traditional scientific discussion.

Response 3: Thanks for this comment. We have added two sections in revision: discussion, limitations and future research. In the discussion, we compared this paper with previous studies on the subject, and analyzed the commonalities, contradictions and improvements of our paper. In the limitations and future research, we analyzed the limitations of our research and proposed the possible research directions in the future.

 

Point 4: Lastly, this scientific discussion section should also include a comparative analysis with other international case studies that allows contextualizing the extent to which the Chinese phenomenon is relevant worldwide, citing specific cases that allow us to see to what extent it could be export the methodology used and knowledge acquired to other parts of the planet.

Response 4: Thanks for this comment. The discussion section in revision has added comparisons of China’s cases with Germany, Netherlands, France, Italy and Indonesia, in order to increase the reference value of Chinese case studies to other countries.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I have enjoyed this opportunity to review this manuscript. I found it to present an interesting approach of examining whether environmental decentralization can contribute to increase of urban construction land supply

The manuscript as it is, I believe needs some improvements before being considered for publication. I hope that my suggestions below provide some guidance for the authors as they revise this manuscript.

First of all, I advise the authors to immediately clarify in the first section what they mean by environmental decentralization, making precise references to the literature, then to deepen its reference framework in the legislation in the second section. Furthermore, in the first section, it would be interesting to have references on environmental decentralization by making international references.

For example, it is not clear what is included in environmental matters in China. the pollution? protected areas? the energy? it should be clarified which subjects are included in the Chinese environmental decentralization system.  In the second session some generic reference is made to pollution and green areas but it is not sufficient to understand which themes are included and which instead belong to other forms of territorial government.

Does it concern only the "land" or also the "water"?

The analysis is clear and the results quite well presented. 

As far as policy recommendations are concerned, it would be useful to understand what the implications for urban planning could be. I would suggest that the authors delve into this aspect, therefore not only focusing on general policy issues but also on useful indications on the spatial planning level, if possible.

As for the bibliographic references, I would suggest expanding them to include more international authors as well, those cited limit the discussion to mainly Chinese references. This does not allow the article to have an international scope

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear reviewer,

Thanks for your important comments on this manuscript. The authors appreciate the constructive comments and technical questions provided by the reviewer. Those comments have been very helpful for the authors to improve the quality of this manuscript. The authors tried to answer the questions in this revision and improve the quality of this paper. The point-to-point responses to the comments by reviewer are listed one by one as follow:

Reviewer 2

I have enjoyed this opportunity to review this manuscript. I found it to present an interesting approach of examining whether environmental decentralization can contribute to increase of urban construction land supply.

The manuscript as it is, I believe needs some improvements before being considered for publication. I hope that my suggestions below provide some guidance for the authors as they revise this manuscript.

 

Point 1: First of all, I advise the authors to immediately clarify in the first section what they mean by environmental decentralization, making precise references to the literature, then to deepen its reference framework in the legislation in the second section. Furthermore, in the first section, it would be interesting to have references on environmental decentralization by making international references.

For example, it is not clear what is included in environmental matters in China. the pollution? protected areas? the energy? it should be clarified which subjects are included in the Chinese environmental decentralization system. In the second session some generic reference is made to pollution and green areas but it is not sufficient to understand which themes are included and which instead belong to other forms of territorial government.

Does it concern only the "land" or also the "water"?

Response 1: Thanks for this comment. The introduction section in revision has added the definition of environmental decentralization and the objects of environmental management in China. In institutional background and theoretical analysis section, the Chinese decentralization has been elaborated in more detail. In addition, we have referred to more non-Chinese literature and mentioned the impact of decentralization on the expansion of construction land in other countries, such as France, Italy, and Indonesia.

As for the object of China's environmental management, according to Environmental Protection Law of the People's Republic of China, all factors affecting human survival and development are the objects of environmental management, including natural elements (atmosphere, water, land, etc.), as well as artificial transformation elements (nature reserves, urban and rural areas, etc.).

http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/englishnpc/Special/CombatingClimateChange/2009-08/28/content_1516267.htm

 

Point 2: As far as policy recommendations are concerned, it would be useful to understand what the implications for urban planning could be. I would suggest that the authors delve into this aspect, therefore not only focusing on general policy issues but also on useful indications on the spatial planning level, if possible.

Response 2: Thanks for this comment. urban planning is an important means to control the expansion of construction land scale. The policy suggestions section in revision have been improved. Planning has been considered to coordinate environmental protection and construction land expansion.

 

Point 3: As for the bibliographic references, I would suggest expanding them to include more international authors as well, those cited limit the discussion to mainly Chinese references. This does not allow the article to have an international scope.

Response 3: Thanks for this comment. The authors referred more international literature when revising the manuscript, and a large number of international authors' literature have been added to the revision.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx