Urbanization in Dynamics: The Influence of Land Quota Trading on Land and Population Urbanization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper analyzes the influence of Land Quotas Trading on land and population urbanization, using the time-varying DID model and examining from both sending and receiving areas' perspectives. The topic is interesting and intensely relevant to urbanization.

The paper is well written, but I think several issues still need to be addressed before publication.

1. Data in lines 29-30 need to provide reliable sources.

2. “However, there is limited literature addressing the impact of LQT on urbanization”, it is recommended that the authors add these limitations and research gaps.

3. (1) Dependent Variables

The authors provide extensive information on the measurement of land urbanization and population urbanization in the previous three paragraphs, but in the subsequent selection of measures, only land urbanization rate and population density were chosen as proxy variables for land urbanization and population urbanization, respectively.

The data availability argument is too thin.

Why does population urbanization not apply to the population urbanization rate, but to population density? Population urbanization rates are still relatively common.

4. “U, L represent the standardized values of land urbanization rate and population density”, standardized methods need to be introduced.

5. The author's discussion was not sufficient. The authors should extend their thinking on the key findings and compare them with the relevant research results of other scholars to find similarities and differences between them.

6. What is the theoretical innovation of this article? The description in the paper is relatively vague, and the author needs to provide a clearer explanation.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

no

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for taking the time to review the manuscript of Urbanization in Dynamics : The Influence of Land Quotas Trading on Land and Population Urbanization. Your insightful comments and suggestions have provided valuable guidance for improving the quality of our work.

Please refer to the attachment for our modified response.

Best regards,

Tian Tian

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments on

The article entitled “Urbanization in Dynamics: The Influence of Land Quotas Trading on Land and Population Urbanization”

 

[Manuscript submitted to the LAND Journal]

I read the article titled “Urbanization in Dynamics: The Influence of Land Quotas Trading on Land and Population Urbanization” with the appropriate care. Given the title, the article handles an interesting field of research and thus the expectations are rather high. According to my opinion, the article has some merits, and the issue could be made an interesting one. However, the article presents some problems in his structure and has some weaknesses.

My comments on the article are as follows:

·        The main question addressed by the research

This article analyzes the impact mechanism of Land Quotas Trading (LQT) system on “land-population urbanization” through the lens of urban spatial expansion, population migration, and human-land coordination. The article uses a time-varying DID (Difference-in-Differences) approach to empirically examine the impact of the LQT system on land urbanization, population urbanization, as well as the urbanization coordination of land and population.

·        The originality of the article and its contribution to the subject area

The article deals mainly with "Land Quotas Trading" (LQT), a system that is based on "Chongqing Municipal Regulations on Land Quotas", and, I think, is only implemented in China.

The main thrust of the article concerns the application of the time-varying DID model to assess the impact of the LQT policy on land urbanization and population urbanization. However, the Literature Review of the article is limited to the analysis of key concepts such as "land urbanization", "population urbanization" and "coordination of urbanization". I believe that the Literature Review should include the analysis of other methodologies that have been applied to evaluate other similar government policies, such as the Land Quotas Trading (LQT) system implemented in China that had as result the establishing a unified urban-rural building land market.

The originality of the article can be highlighted, if it is preceded by the description of other methodologies that have been applied to evaluate the above government policy of China or similar policy of other countries, as well as the comparison of these methodologies with the methodology applied in the article.

·        Specific improvements the authors should consider.

I believe that the authors should proceed to an enrichment of the Literature Review including in it a critical analysis of other methodologies similar to the one proposed in the article. These methodologies should have been applied to similar public policy issues in China or other countries. Also, a description of any other studies evaluating China's agricultural land policy and population urbanization and a brief comparison of their results with the results of this study should be made.

As a result of the aforementioned, the references should be enriched with others referring to the methodologies that will be included in the Literature Review.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your insightful and constructive comments regarding the manuscript of Urbanization in Dynamics : The Influence of Land Quotas Trading on Land and Population Urbanization. We greatly appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our work. 
Please refer to the attachment for our modified response.

Best regards,

Tian Tian

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I think the article in the revised form has been improved satisfactorily and therefore recommend its publication in the Journal

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I think the article in the revised form has been improved satisfactorily and therefore recommend its publication in the Journal