Investigation and Suggestions regarding Residents’ Understanding of Waste Classification in Chinese Prefecture-Level Cities—A Case Study of Maanshan City, Anhui Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Thanks for studying garbage classification scenario in China. These efforts may enhance environmental protection and are of utmost importance to be analyzed. However, it is recommended to improve much more the manuscript and the data presented to consider its publication in Sustainability journal. Providing irrefutable proofs is convenient to strengthen an article, what facilitates its citation.

These comments have been found:

1) Why only Maanshan City? Do the environmental policies taken by the local government on this city influence the climate awareness-raising of its inhabitants? Perhaps it would be better to compare also among cities out of the Green Cities considered in China.

2) Relationship among questions and options is not clear in Table 1.

3) Correlation among questions and P, EC and RE is also not very clear in Table 1.

4) A survey based on a simple questionnaire gathered through Internet is perhaps not a definite source for obtaining guaranteed data nowadays. Same person (or bot) may answer several times or reply in the name of other people. Since social networks use is uneven among the population, survey might have a bias. Of course, this is independent of the statistical analysis performed, because it entails selection of the population studied.

5) Independently of the statistical checking parameters, it is convenient to establish a psychological check in the survey's questionnaire too. These questions may confirm honestly of the participants in the answers submitted.

In this particular case, results could be confirmed by measuring garbage classification performed by the people at strategic disposal points, and reports of companies or departments in charge of this commitment. Why not contrasting conscious results to real data showing actual garbage sorting?

Best regards.

Very few typographic errors, like dots missing, "re" instead of "RE", etc.

Manuscript is basically well written.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Article: Investigation and Suggestions on Residents' Consciousness of 2 Garbage Classification in China Prefecture-level Cities —— A 3 Case Study of Maanshan City, Anhui Province, China

The study and statistical methods were correctly applied. With a sample size of 1350, it is already possible to correctly conclude on a general level what the authors did correctly. The only disadvantage of this study is too narrow research scope. The study should clearly indicate this fact or treat it as a pilot/preliminary study. With this assumption, the authors should undertake proper research on a wider range of determinants affecting Residents' Enthusiasm (RE) and Ecological Civilization (EC). Understanding the underlying causes of these two variables would allow the Chinese government to implement a more efficient Policy (P). The government's policy could be differentiated in terms of the target group, as the authors indicate in the discussion, but in-depth research is needed for this.

Minor remarks:

Line 10 - remove the word "beautiful", these aspects have not been researched and scientists should leave subjective judgment to the reader.

Line 96 - delete "(Figure 3b)", there is no such graph in the article.

 

There are two characters "——" in the title, is that correct?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

1) The objectives are not clear.

2) Is the sample representative? What was the sampling method and strategy?

3) Why is RE the dependent variable? For example, EC could be another dependent variable, implying a potential endogeneity problem.

4) How did you get the path diagram, and what is its meaning?

 

The first couple of paragraphs were clear, but then English was not clear, and there is no logical flow in the paper.
The present manuscript must go a thorough English editing and a flow improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The article is an original study of car thieves of a critical issue - the separate collection of garbage and understanding of the importance of this process by Chinese citizens. In addition to the obvious aspects, the green economy has another hidden one. Only with a responsible attitude of citizens, a deep understanding of the influence of each, and the responsibility of each for environmental protection is it possible to implement it.
The article's authors study the main factors affecting the ek, analyze the results obtained and come to interesting conclusions.
The article will be of interest to the readers of the journal.

Author Response

We are greatly thankful to the reviewer for the encouragement on our work and the good comments.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Thanks for considering the comments stated.

Manuscript has been improved in my opinion, and deserves being published in Sustainability journal.

Best regards.

Author Response

We are greatly thankful to the reviewer for the encouragement on our work and the good comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

I thank the authors for their review. I think my comments were not addressed:

1) The comment about whether the sample was representative or not was not addressed.

2) The justification that future research will follow up with more variables is not enough. Each paper should be a stand-alone work. 

3) I still think there is an endogeneity or feedback effect between the two variables, making Table 4 results inconsistent. The problem is made worse by not controlling for other variables (Age, gender, and so on).

 

 

The flow and language should be improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf