Spatial Evolution of the Energy and Economic Centers of Gravity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The main purpose of the manuscript is to analyse the world’s energy and economic centres of gravity between 1990 and 2015. Furthermore, the authors apply gravity models in order to identify the economic and energy centres of gravity in the world and on different continents and to reveal their movements. This is an interesting research topic and also important for the readers of the journal. Taking under consideration the overall presentation of the manuscript it is clear that an interesting research work has been done.

However, some concerns arise regarding the manuscript. The research questions as well as the original contribution of the work, comparing to other previous works are not adequately presented. I would also expect a more critical review of other works in the research problem and a further analysis and explanation of the research approach. The authors should place more emphasis on (a) the detailed presentation of the calculations, (b) the coupling between the theoretical and the experimental analysis and (c) the original approach to the analysis of the problem.

Therefore, I recommend publication of the manuscript, but subject to major revisions.

 

Additional comments and recommendations for the improvement of the manuscript are given below:

 

General notes

Ø  All the acronyms should be explained within the manuscript.

Ø  In-text citations include the reference number enclosed in square brackets or the author names in running text and the date of publication inside parentheses.

Ø  All the equation symbols must be defined within the manuscript.

 

1. Introduction

A subsection is needed in the first part of the introduction.

[Fig. 1] Please add labels to the x and y axes.

[Lines 50-52] “In the group of developed countries … during the time period of 1990-1995 and 1.7% between 1995 and 2000”. An in-text citation is required here.

 

2. Materials and Methods

General note: Section 2.4 could be further analyzed.

[Line 209] The symbols of xi and yi should be the same with the corresponding symbols in Equations (1) and (2).

[Lines 261-267] This paragraph should be placed after Table 2.

 

3. Results

[Fig. 2] Fig. 2 is quite confusing. A better presentation is needed.

[Lines 292-293] “Figure 2 specifies the Top 10 energy consumer countries based on their share of global final energy consumption”. An in-text citation is needed here.

[Lines 346-381] These paragraphs should be placed before Figure 3.

[Figs 3, 4 & 5] The quality of the maps as well as the legend should be improved. A scale is missing.

[Table 5] A more detailed presentation of Table 5 is needed.

 

4. Discussion

General note: This section is too short and it should be further analyzed according to the calculation results. The original contribution of the work could be also presented here.

 

5. Conclusion

General note: In this section, the original contribution of the research has to be presented by focusing on the research results according to the research questions.

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam,

First of all, we would like to thank you your work and valuable comments on our study. We considered your suggestions, here is the answers and modifications:

- we supplemented the study with the main research questions. Line 95-98;

- the original contribution of the work can be found in Line  187-193;

- all the acronyms are explained;

- we developed the citations based on the format requirements;

- all the equations symbols were checked and developed (with special regard to the Chow-test)

- we created subsections in the Introduction part;

- we added the labels and we supplemented the in-text citation as well;

- section 2.4 is further developed (further explanations were pasted);

 - you wrote: "[Lines 261-267] This paragraph should be placed after Table 2." I am sorry, but we could not understand it. Right now it is after the Table.

- Figure 2: we developed the explanation. Now, it is more clear.

- "[Lines 346-381] These paragraphs should be placed before Figure 3." Done.

- "[Figs 3, 4 & 5] The quality of the maps as well as the legend should be improved. A scale is missing." Done.

- We substantially modified the abstract, discussion and conclusion parts.

I hope you can accept our modifications. If need anything else, please contact us.

Best regards,

The authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

The paper presents an analysis on the world’s energy and economic centres of gravity between 1990 and 2015. The topic is interesting, but there are several issues to be addressed:

-the objectives are not clearly indicated in the abstract;

-the applications and implications of the main findings are not clearly indicated in the abstract;

-clearly indicate the limitations of this study;

-clearly indicate how the findings can be applied and the next steps in research.

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

First of all, we would like to thank you for your work and valuable comments on our study. We considered your suggestions, here is the answers and modifications:

- we supplemented the study with the main research questions. Line 95-98;

- We substantially modified the abstract, discussion and conclusion parts (Line 560-565 contains the next steps).

 - we clearly present the limitations of the study, subchapter 2.1.1.

I hope you can accept our modifications. If need anything else, please contact us.

 

Best regards,

 

The authors

Reviewer 3 Report

Paper titled "Spatial evolution of the energy and economic centers of gravity" in interesting way analyzes aspects related to energy demand that are very important in the modern economy. The article is written correctly, Introduction gives good background for purpose and research methods. The gravity models gives in simple way shows shift of energy centers  The universal method is well chosen for the study. The results were correctly presented and interesting conclusions were drawn for the future.

 

The article should be published in Research Journal after few improvements:

 

- It should be specified on what basis “developing countries” have been defined (source)

- The purpose of the research is well defined, however it is too far in the text. It should be moved more to the beginning.

- author/s should consider adding some recent literature, because there are not too many of them.

Author Response

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

First of all, we would like to thank you for your work and valuable comments on our study. We considered your suggestions, here is the answers and modifications:

- we supplemented the study with the main research questions. Line 95-98;

- the original contribution of the work can be found in Line 187-193;

- we clarify the term of developing countries (Line 31-33);

- we substantially modified the abstract, discussion and conclusion parts.

I hope you can accept our modifications. If need anything else, please contact us.

 

Best regards,

 

The authors

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

In the revised edition, the manuscript has been significantly improved and covered my comments

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you that you appreciate our efforts.

Best regards,

The authors