Improving Energy Efficiency in China Based on Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper analyzed the overall energy efficiency in China and some improvement paths are discussed. There are some comments:

1. Configurations "L1 L2" in table 4 and so on should be explained.

2. Description for conclusions of this paper should be clearer.

3. The unique figure, Figure.1, should contain more information. It will be better to modify it as a brief introduction of the whole paper. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for taking time to review the paper and making suggestions for improvement,which is an invaluable growth opportunity for me. Here's the explanation and revision instructions for your questions:

1. Table 4 is the result of the robustness test. If the robustness test result is not much different from the paths of the configuration result and the parameters are similar, we can consider the configuration result to be robust. However, since the configuration of the robustness test generally has no substantive significance, the configuration results in Table 4 do not require in-depth qualitative analysis. This is why the article used the configuration results in Table 3 instead of the results in Table 4.
2. According to your revision suggestion, we described the conclusion of this paper in further details and adjusted the conclusion structure to make it clearer.
3. Based on your suggestion, we supplemented the explanation of Figure 1 and expanded it into an independent section.

For more details please see the revised manuscript we uploaded.

Best regards,

Bingyue Sun

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Many thanks for your drafts, which I have read with interest. Before I can recommend its publication, there are a number of remarks I would like you to address:

Major comments

1. In page 2, the first paragraph is a repetition of similar comments. Please shorten it.

2. Equation 2 should be checked. The summation goes from 2 to 3 only? Besides, explain with more detail the parameters.

3. References: The latest one is 1 reference from 2020, the rest are older. Please check new literature on the topic and add it. Besides, focus please on other research groups, not only those located in your country, you may find interesting things to add to the paper.

Minor comments

1. It is academics, not academicians, please correct in the whole paper.

2. In the abstract, describe better the paths.

3. Add unit in equation 1.

4. Page 8, line 333/335: add reference.

5. Page 8, line 342: use better TCE unit of energy

6. Page 8, line 346: add equivalence to euros or dollars.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your careful review and making valuable comments. This is a very valuable growth opportunity for me. The revision instructions are as follows:

1. Shortened the content of the first paragraph on the second page in the text.

2.Checked Equation 2 and made more explanations of the parameters in Equation 2.

3. Updated the year of references, especially paying attention to international journals.

(For more details please see the revised manuscript we attached .)

For your comments, here are the revision instructions:

1. Replaced “academicians”with “academics”in the whole paper.
2. Pathway conclusions were described in more detail in the abstract.
3. Added units to formula 1.
4. Added references.
5. Modified the TCE unit of energy.
6. The dollar equivalents were added to the amounts in RMB as the unit in the text.

(For more details please see the revised manuscript )

Best regards,

Bingyue Sun

Reviewer 3 Report

This study is on the effects of allocation on technical progress, industrial structure, energy consumption structure, and economic level on energy efficiency based on a sample of China using qualitative comparative analysis. The quality of paper is considerable and it is well written but some major structural comments should be answered by the authors.

The introduction needs reframing, in its current style, it is not consistent and informative. to do this task follow the stages of background: in which you should talk about the importance of the topic, literature: you should review the previous publications in this field, Research gaps: talk about the gaps in previous research and necessity of your own, aims: present your aims to fill the gaps of research, structure: mention the structure of your paper.
A more informative flowchart is needed in the method section to clearly explain the stream of your methodology. Then a discussion section is needed and you should compare your finding with other sources and compare the methods with each other. The conclusion should be: A summary of the paper, highlights of your results and general conclusions from those findings, limitations of the research, and recommandations for future researchs.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for making time to review the article and giving valuable suggestions. In response to your comments, we made the revisions as follows:

1. We revised the introduction section. Existing research gaps, the purpose of the research, and the structure of the paper were included in the introductionsection.
2. We added Table 2—QCA method flow chart to the main text. In this part, the research process of QCA method was introduced and compared with other methods. In addition, the conclusion part of the paperwasrearranged.

For more details please see the revised manuscript we uploaded.

Best regards

Bingyue Sun

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

All comments are answered and paper is acceptable.