What Are the Impacts of Urbanisation on Carbon Emissions Efficiency? Evidence from Western China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper's framework is well presented, clear, and consistent with the research method, which is rigorous. Results are well presented and clear. The policy implications in the conclusions could be discussed more in detail, in the light of the thorough analysis presented in the paper, but other than that the article is ready for publication.
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
The paper's framework is well presented, clear, and consistent with the research method, which is rigorous. The results are well-presented and clear. The policy implications in the conclusions could be discussed more in detail, in the light of the thorough analysis presented in the paper, but other than that the article is ready for publication.
Response: The author has enriched the conclusions in lines 455-459, and lines 467-470, and the future political action in lines 490-495, and lines 500-503, and research directions in lines 504to 517
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The study is well presented, I have some comments for the further improvement of the manuscript before submission. File is enclosed.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
English should be improved.
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
There are many similar researches in the current literature but the scope is interesting and research about this field is interesting, but from my point of view, the paper requires further improvement before publishing:
1) The abstract is too long and is not well-written. Please delete the repeated words. The authors
should include quantitative results in the abstract.
Response: The authors have revised the abstract.
- Detailed theoretical explanation should be included in the introduction.
Response: The authors have revised the introduction, and added the theoretical explanation in 84-86 and 90-92.
- Whatis the main novelty of the research? Clarify.
Response: The authors have revised the contents of the main contribution and innovation points in 120-129, which are as follows:
The main contribution and innovation points of this research are as follows: (1) This research is making the theoretical analysis of the impact mechanism of urbanisation on CEE. (2) It uses a sample of Western China for the empirical study of the impacts of urbanisation on CEE, which is not addressed in the literature on this topic; (3) It explores the mechanism through which urbanisation impacts CEE in Western China, with great hopes of overcoming the regional environmental constraints on urbanisation development and of enhancing regional sustainable development; (4) It focuses on emission-reduction policies in Western China, which will help policymakers in developing appropriate economic, energy, and environmental policies for Western China.
4) The literature review section should be expanded. Some latest studies on the topic may be
added:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119592
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113569
Response: The author has added the related literature in 88-110.
- Could the methodology be applied in different situations?
Response: This this paper only explored the effects of urbanisation on CEE from the inter-provincial panel data; the methodology can be applied at the municipal level, or corporation level, which can be the future research directions.
- Results section should be improved.
Response: The author has revised the results of the Tobit regression in lines 399-400, 425-427, and 432-436.
7) Conclusion part is pretty weak, it should be rewritten. In the conclusion section policy implications should be consistent with the findings and should be presented in detail. What are the limitations of the
study?
Response: The author has enriched the conclusions in lines 455-459, and lines 467-470, and the future political action in lines 490-495, and lines 500-503, and research directions in lines 504to 517
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
General statements like china will achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 should me mentioned as a goal not as a given fact.
Other non parametric models could have been taken. Like Bayesian regression or others. Why were they overlooked?
Figure one shows a modest reduction in GHG in west China? While showing an increase in urbanization. This begs the question of whether the full LCA was considered or not
finally when we talk about sustainability it’s adequate to include social elements. Since these urbanization projects will affect people. It’s not clear if this is addresses the local west china heritage and culture
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
1) General statements like China will achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 should be mentioned as a goal not as a given fact.
Response: The authors have revised the novelty points, and deleted the contents:“(4)
Its research findings are very important for China to achieve its targets of peak carbon
emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, and developing a low-carbon economic
system and society”
- Other nonparametricmodels could have been taken. Like Bayesian regression or others. Why were they overlooked
Response: The values of Carbon emission efficiency range from 0.533 to 1.075, which are still censored. Estimating a model with a censored dependent variable using the ordinary least squares (OLS) method provides biased and inconsistent results in parametric estimations. Bayesian regression cannot solve this problem. The Tobit model can solve this problem by the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE).
- Figure one shows a modest reduction in GHG in west China? While showing an increase in urbanization. This begs the question of whether the full LCA was considered or not
Response: Figure one shows GHG in west China shows an increasing trend from 2010-2019, and its proportion in the whole country shows an increasing trend from 2010 to 2017 but shows a decreasing trend after 2017. With rapid urbanization and industrialization, the CO2 in western China would continue to grow in the coming years. Therefore, there are no begs in Figure One.
4) finally when we talk about sustainability it’s adequate to include social elements. Since these urbanization projects will affect people. It’s not clear if this addresses the local west china heritage and culture
Response: The protection of heritage and culture is the problem in the rapid urbanisation in the west of China. High-quality urbanization should protect the heritage and culture. Protecting the heritage and culture should be one of the future research directions in lines 514-517
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors,
Please find comments:
1. The title contains the concept of "carbon efficiency". This concept is not presented in detail in the text. Existing methods for determining the efficiency of carbon emissions have not been investigated, the shortcomings of these methods and the purpose of this study have not been shown. It is not clear what the authors propose new? Refinement of methods for determining the efficiency of emissions? Or the use of well-known techniques for a specific area?
2. After the Introduction comes the Section 2. Materials and Methodology.
Maybe it would be better if a litreture review was traditionally presented, where an analysis of the current level of development of this direction was made. Then the problems that the authors are going to solve are identified. It is necessary to emphasize the novelty of this study.
3. It is desirable to describe in more detail where the authors took the data for the analysis of the models, since only the results of the models are given, and the sources of data with the date of access are not indicated.
4. The section "Discussion" is also necessary, as it presents the novelty of research.
It is desirable to consider in more detail the concept of "urbanization", its components and their impact on the efficiency of carbon emissions. Maybe show it in the form of a diagram.
5. Analyze the ecological potential of this region. Can he cope with the load that is now in the region?The conclusions are quite positive, that is, if there is technical progress, there will be improvements, which is good for the region. But there is no analysis of other risks or the effect of accumulation of negative effects.
6. The abstract needs to be reworked. The first phrase cannot be left like this! You need to add specific results.
7. The conclusions contain general expressions that are known even without this study. It may be possible to show the main conclusions in numerical (numerical) terms.
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
1) The title contains the concept of "carbon efficiency". This concept is not presented in detail in the text. Existing methods for determining the efficiency of carbon emissions have not been investigated, and the shortcomings of these methods and the purpose of this study have not been shown. It is not clear what the authors propose new? . Refinement of methods for determining the efficiency of emissions? Or the use of well-known techniques for a specific area.
Response: The concept of carbon emission efficiency is presented in lines 61-72; The main methods for determining the efficiency of carbon emissions are stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA), and the shortcomings of SFA methods are presented in line lines 72-78, and the reason of applying DEA are presented in line lines 79-81. This paper applied the super-EBM model with undesirable outputs, which is an improved DEA model, and the advantage of that is shown in lines 291-295.
- After the Introduction comes the Section 2. Materials and Methodology.
Maybe it would be better if a litreture literature review was traditionally presented, where an analysis of the current level of development of this direction was made. Then the problems that the authors are going to solve are identified. It is necessary to emphasize the novelty of this study.
Response: The authors have revised the introduction, and added the related literature in 88-110;
The authors have summed the problems that exist in the current studies in 109-114.
The authors have revised the contents of the main contribution and innovation points in 120-129,
- It is desirable to describe in more detail where the authors took the data for the analysis of the models, since only the results of the models are given, and the sources of data with the date of access are not indicated.
Response: The authors have added the sources of data in lines 189, 240-241.
4) The section "Discussion" is also necessary, as it presents the novelty of the research.
It is desirable to consider in more detail the concept of "urbanization", its components, and their impact on the efficiency of carbon emissions. Maybe show it in the form of a diagram.
Response: Results discussion is in lines 395-453. The proportion of the urban resident population to the total population is widely applied to measure urbanisation levels, which are also can be called ”population urbanisation”. “Land urbanisation”(The proportion of the urban constructive land to the total administrative area ), or “Economic urbanisation”(The proportion of the urban economic output value to the total economic output value ) also can be measuring the urbanisation level, which is the future research directions that shown in line 519-511.
- Analyze the ecological potential of this region. Can he cope with the load that is now in the region?The conclusions are quite positive, that is, if there is technical progress, there will be improvements, which is good for the region. But there is no analysis of other risks or the effect of accumulation of negative effects.
Response: Carbon emission efficiency can be one of the indicators for measuring the quality of regional development. The ecological potentiality or ecological load in western China can be the future research direction.
In the results discussion, the authors have pointed out the exists possibility of the rebound effect in lines 450-453, which are the result of the potential effects of the technical progress.
- The abstract needs to be reworked. The first phrase cannot be left like this! You need to add specific results.
Response: The authors have revised the abstract in lines 13-17 and 28-29.
7) The conclusions contain general expressions that are known even without this study. It may be possible to show the main conclusions in numerical (numerical) terms.
study?
Response: The authors have revised the main conclusions by using numerical (numerical) terms.
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thanks for the revision. I have reviewed the original version of the following manuscript, submitted to Land: Title: What are the Impacts of Urbanisation on Carbon Emissions Efficiency?Evidence from Western China I have some minor reviews on it for the authors. Kindly, enclose the file. Thanks
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
1) Please add the quantitate results how much increasing and decreasing CEE of the 11 western
provinces not just write that it is quantitative research in the abstract section.
Response: The authors have added the quantitate results of how much increasing and decreasing CEE of the 11 western provinces in lines 354 to 362, and lines 19 to 24 (the abstract section).
- Please correct lines Line 77, 86, 160, Write CO2 instead of CO2. Envelope analysis (DEA), first proposed by Charnes et al. [19], also kindly read the whole manuscript carefully.
Response: The authors have revised the CO2 instead of CO2, and read the whole manuscript carefully.
- Kindly, Revised your Literature Section. The literature review section should be expanded. Some latest studies on the topic may be
added:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119592
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113569
Response: The author has added the related literature in lines 96-103, and lines 108-115.
The literature of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119592 has been added in lines 539.
The literature of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113569 has been added in lines 97-99
4) For reader it is difficult to read (NBSC), some abbreviated words are not defined.:
Response: The author has added the “National Bureau of Statistics of China(NBSC) [4].“ in line 207.
5) Results section need to improve. Kindly, write results discussion according to your analysis.
Response: The author has added the Results discussion in lines 437-429, and lines 446-445, and lines 486-490.
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Reviewer 3 Report
from line 62 - 147 can be reduced.
When the authors use CO2. Do they mean the equivilant?
Author Response
R3: From line 62 - 147 can be reduced.
When the authors use CO2. Do they mean the equivilant?
Responses: No, CO2 emission does not mean its equivalent to carbon emission. The lines 62-147 has become the lines 98-158 in the new manuscript, which includes the literatures [5-31]. As we can see from the titles of the literatures [24-31], it presented“CO2 emissions”. As for the literatures [5-23], we have checked the papers, and found that the carbon emissions is not the equivilant CO2。Therefore, the CO2 emissions of literatures [5-31] don not belong to the equivilant CO2.
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors,
Thank you for the corrections made, which made it possible to improve the paper.
Unfortunately, corrections of the abstract do not give a complete picture of the results of the study.
Authors should show concrete results in the abstract, not well-known phrases.
Author Response
Dear Editor,
Thank you very much for your great comments and suggestions on our paper. We have modified the manuscript accordingly.
Unfortunately, corrections of the abstract do not give a complete picture of the results of the study. Authors should show concrete results in the abstract, not well-known phrases.
Response: The authors have revised the abstract which shows concrete results.
It is worth noting that the authors have added the quantitative results of the amount increased and decreased in CEE of the 11 western provinces in lines 19-24. The addition of lines 19-24 aligns with the modification requirements of the other reviewer.
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal now.
Regards
Liangen Zeng
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors need to make further minor corrections e.g., - Please correct the line 90, write CO2- Same do it for lines, 105-111.
Minor editing
Author Response
Authors need to make further minor corrections e.g.,
- Please correct the line 90, write CO2
- Same do it for lines, 105-111.
Responses: the authors have revised the all CO2 into CO2.
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors,
Firstly, the article in pdf in correction mode is very difficult to read!
As a matter of fact, remarks:
1. The Introduction is too heavy. It is necessary to divide into two parts with the Literature Review, which you have from line 95 - this is the review!
2. Figure 2 consists of two Figures, but captions for only one.
3. In most research papers, the hypothesis or statement of purpose is placed at the end of the Introduction section. Research hypothesis is a statement that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result. Therefore, you need to be careful and thorough when putting a research hypothesis.
There are grammatical errors after new directions, which needs polishing
Author Response
R4: Firstly, the article in pdf in correction mode is very difficult to read!
As a matter of fact, remarks:
Responses: we has changed the manuscript; the problem has been resolved
- The Introduction is too heavy. It is necessary to divide into two parts
with the Literature Review, which you have from line 95 - this is the review!
Responses: The authors have set the 2. Literature review to meet the requirment.
- Figure 2 consists of two Figures, but captions for only one.
Responses: Figure 2 only consists of one figure: urbanisation rate.
- In most research papers, the hypothesis or statement of purpose is placed
at the end of the Introduction section. Research hypothesis is a statement
that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result.
Therefore, you need to be careful and thorough when putting a research
hypothesis.
Responses: The authors have putted a research hypothesis in lines 85-87 of Introduction
