Technological Innovation, Production Efficiency, and Sustainable Development: A Case Study from Shenzhen in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic of the study is very interesting for research as well as development.

The analysis herein has been cross-checked carefully is a great contribution. However, the paper needs some improvements.

1. The goal of the paper could be made clearer to be meaningful for the study.
2. English revision is required as some sentences are incomplete or missing words e.g  Line 315 among others
3. The discussion and conclusion look so different from the rest of the paper. I suggest discussing also the analyzed results and also draw conclusions according to the results. This will make your study relevant.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript's standardization, research purpose, results, and innovation are nice, with no significant defects. The Abstract and Introduction clearly describe the necessity and relevance of the research, the method of studying the main issues is appropriate, the results are clearly expressed, and the logic is rigorous. The conclusion reasonably answers the questions raised by the author in the Introduction. The way of writing and presentation is great. Only the following points still need to be further developed:

1. Compare the similarities and differences between SFA and commonly used DEA. Does the proposed SFA method show better performance?
2. Explain the relationship between Guangdong Province and the study area Shenzhen and how the reduced efficiency of Guangdong Province will affect the construction of Shenzhen's sustainable development demonstration zone.
3. There are some inaccuracies in the language of the article. The author still needs to check the language of the whole article. The connection between paragraphs can be closer.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this paper, the authors analyse the impact in Shenzhen of different issues like technological innovation, production efficiency and sustainable development. With data from 2001 to 2019, authors employ a panel data analysis and conclude for the relationship between socioeconomic status and different economic variables. The paper is interesting, but I think that some issues should be improved, in particular:

1. It is necessary that the authors deepen the literature review. They do not need to crease a new section, but in the introduction they should identify more relevant literature related with the topic.
2. Regarding the methodology, the authors should also identify the benefits of their methodology in comparison with others which are also used in the literature.
3. Still in the methodology, I have one question that I would like to ask: did the authors evaluated the eventual stationarity of the data which is used? At least for the regressions this should be a relevant issue.
4. I felt somehow confused when read the results section. For example, the first section of the results is a question which I didn't see answered in the text.
5. I believe that the last section, as presented, is useless. Note that I do not think that it is wrong, but I believe that it could perfectly merged with the previous section.
6. Authors should also make a final proofreading of the paper. In some parts the text is confusing, making it difficult to be read. But, mainly, the language should be always scientific and not trivial (why to use, "my" in the text?).

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I am satisfied with the answers of the authors. I just recommend one adding, regarding with my original question about the stationarity. Authors answered correctly to my question, in my opinion, although they should reflect it in the paper.

Author Response

Dear esteemed referee,

We are deeply grateful for your recognition of us. We will add your suggestions in the Methodology section.

Thank you so much for your help in improving the quality of our manuscripts.

Sincerely,
Dr. YANG, Yifu
School of Environment & Natural Resources, 
Renmin University of China