Spatial Disequilibrium and Dynamic Evolution of Eco-Efficiency in China’s Tea Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article focuses on measuring the environmental performance of China's tea industry. This article meets the requirements for the presentation of a scientific study. The methodology is consistent with the goal. Empirical research is presented adequately.

Conclusions summarize the information presented in the article.

The comments are stylistic in nature:

1. Authors need to look at the names of tables and figures throughout the text. The names are missing the first letter in the first words.

2. Also, the authors should consider the possibility of quoting a semantic construction that occurs several times in the text: Error! Reference source not found. "Error! Reference source not found" without a dot inside, because ".," does not follow the norms of punctuation.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

     Thank you very much for your affirmation and reply to my article. Your affirmation means a lot to me! I have revised the paper tables and figures in accordance with your comments. Other details have also been perfected. Thanks again for guiding my article! Have a great life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Using the Dagum Gini Coefficient and Kernel Density Estimation method, this study examines the spatial disequilibrium and dynamic evolution trend of China's tea industry's eco-efficiency. The findings show that the overall level of eco-efficiency in China's tea industry has improved, and spatial disequilibrium has been significantly reduced. The introduction has given a good background to the study. However, adding a separate literature review (most of them are in the introduction) will add some value to this work. Under the research method, most of the variables and equations are not clear. Need to define all the variables clearly. The term “ in Error! Reference source not found” can be found in most of places. Need to go through the entire document carefully and address such issues. Need to draw the economic interpretation of the results. I find a very weak interpretation. The conclusion and Policy Implication section can be acceptable. 

Can be improved

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

     Thank you very much for your affirmation and reply to my article. Your affirmation means a lot to me! I have separated the literature review section of the paper in accordance with your comments, which really makes the structure of the article clearer. Secondly, I also added explanations to the variables in the research method, and corrected the formatting errors in the details in the text. Thank you very much for your attentiveness! There is also the analysis of the article, and I have also refined part of the economic explanation. Thanks again for guiding my article! Have a great life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The processed paper is well written and understandable.  Its content and structure   are relevant. The problem under the investigation  is  well explained and supported by relevant literature overview. Individual objectives are understandable and the methodology is also relevant.  The results and their discussion are acceptable. The final conclusion is rational. The paper is relevant for publishing. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

     Thank you very much for your affirmation and reply to my article. Your affirmation means a lot to me! In the future, I will be more motivated to conduct academic research. Thanks again for guiding my article! Have a great life.

Reviewer 4 Report

Despite the researcher's commendable efforts, the publication lacks a sound theory and the results have little bearing on the global community and sustainability as well. I suggest publishing it in a national journal because the findings will be useful for China's regional planning.I have given some comments for the improvement of the paper.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

The language could be improved

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

       Thank you very much for your reply and guidance on my article. Your guidance means a lot to me! I would like to add a few notes to my article: First, I would like to tell you that studying the eco-efficient evolution of the Chinese tea industry is useful for global society and Sustainability. The ecological efficiency of the tea industry is an important part of measuring undesired output, and its distribution characteristics and evolution laws cannot only show that people attach importance to ecological protection in the process of economic and social development. More importantly, it reveals the process of improving the eco-efficiency of China's tea industry. As a major tea producer in the world, China's tea industry has a long history of development, and the development experience of China's tea industry can provide a reliable reference for other countries. But to make other countries believe in the ecological protection policy of China's tea industry, it is necessary to let them see the results of ecological protection of China's tea industry, and ecological benefits are this representative indicator.

      Secondly, I have also seen research on regional development or eco-efficiency in previous articles on sustainability, which were also published in Sustainability. This shows that Sustainability is an open, inclusive journal. I very much hope that my article will provide some value to Sustainability.

       Also, thank you very much for the careful review of my article! You pointed out a lot of problems that I didn't notice. I revised the content of the article one by one according to your suggestions. I have attached at the end some articles found by Sustainability that have previously been published similar to mine. Thanks again for guiding my article! Have a good life.

[1] Pengfei Ge;Tan Liu;Xiaoxu Wu;Xiulu Huang.Heterogenous Urbanization and Agricultural Green Development Efficiency: Evidence from China[J].Sustainability,2023,Vol.15(5682): 5682. DOI:10.3390/su15075682

[2] Dan Yuan;Runhan Wu;Dong Li;Lei Zhu;Yaguang Pan.Spatial Patterns Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Cultural Resources in the Yellow River National Cultural Park, China[J].Sustainability,2023,Vol.15(6563): 6563. DOI:10.3390/su15086563

[3] Lei Zhu;Jing Hu;Jiahui Xu;Yannan Li;Mangmang Liang.Spatial Distribution Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Pro-Poor Tourism Villages in China[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14(15953): 15953. DOI:10.3390/su142315953

[4] Run Luo;Nianxing Zhou.Dynamic Evolution, Spatial Differences, and Driving Factors of China’s Provincial Digital Economy[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14: 9376. DOI:10.3390/su14159376

[5] Fan Liu;Shuling Zhou;Yaliu Yang;Conghu Liu.Research on Industrial Ecological Efficiency Evaluation and Improvement Countermeasures Based on Data-Driven Evaluations from 30 Provinces and Cities in China[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14: 8665. DOI:10.3390/su14148665

[6] Zhi-Min Yang;Long-Fei Han;Qing-Ping Liu;Chun-Hui Li;Zhao-Yi Pan;Ke Xu.Spatial and Temporal Changes in Wetland in Dongting Lake Basin of China under Long Time Series from 1990 to 2020[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14(3620): 3620. DOI:10.3390/su14063620

[7] Ying Zhang;Yunyan Li.Regional Differences in Tourism Eco-Efficiency in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region: Based on Data from 13 Cities[J].Sustainability,2023,Vol.15(2907): 2907. DOI:10.3390/su15042907

[8] Lei Gao.What Type of Industrial Agglomeration Is Beneficial to the Eco-Efficiency of Northwest China?[J].Sustainability,2021,Vol.13(1): 1. DOI:10.3390/su13010163

[9] Chaogao An;Polat Muhtar;Zhenquan Xiao.Spatiotemporal Evolution of Tourism Eco-Efficiency in Major Tourist Cities in China[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14(13158): 13158. DOI:10.3390/su142013158

[10] Chunbin Zhang;Rong Zhou;Jundong Hou;Mengtong Feng.Spatial-Temporal Evolution and Convergence Characteristics of Agricultural Eco-Efficiency in China from a Low-Carbon Perspective[J].Sustainability,2022,Vol.14(16509): 16509. DOI:10.3390/su142416509

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review to review the paper: “Spatial Disequilibrium and Dynamic Evolution of Eco-efficiency of China’s tea industry.” I provide some comments to help the authors improve its quality.

 

Introduction

The introduction provides important information on tea and China. It is important for readers of other regions worldwide. However, the authors must clarify more why is relevant analyzing the eco-efficiency of tea, and how this study differs from earlier works on this subject.

It is also necessary describe more about green development. Is it synonymous of eco-efficiency?

 

Data sources

Why the authors analyze 2008 to 2019?

“Due to the particularity of the tea industry, some indicators lack direct data” which are these indicators?

It is not clear in equation 2 and 3 what means the “Q” in the line 151: “Among them, Q is the…”.

 Results and analysis

 

There are few discussions with literature. As it stands, the work seems more like a technical text than a scientific one. To be published, it must include discussion of recent studies.

Good

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

       Thank you very much for your affirmation and reply to my article. Your guidance means a lot to me! Based on your suggestion, I have explained more about the link between green development and eco-efficiency in the introduction. Secondly, the data is selected for 2008-2019 because the relevant data of China's tea industry has been recorded in more detail and comprehensively after 2008. After 2019, some statistical work was suspended due to COVID-19. The lack of data for some indicators refers to labor inputs in eco-efficiency inputs, which are not directly counted in some areas and therefore need to be calculated by other methods. Also, my Q in Equation 2 and Equation 3 is a spelling mistake that has been corrected. Thank you very much for your careful review! Finally, I have added discussions with other studies to the introduction and literature review. Thanks again for guiding my article! Have a great life.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors

I appreciate how attentive you were to the comments provided by the article reviewers and how hard you worked to make the paper better.I suggest going back and expanding the global implications of the study's findings in the conclusion section.

The English language needs some minor improvements.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

       thank you very much for affirming my article. I would also like to thank you very much for the changes you made to my article earlier to make it better. I have revised the concluding part of the article according to your comments to make it more meaningful for other countries and regions. In addition, I have improved the language expression of the article a little. Thank you again for your careful review! Have a great life, thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf