Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: Using the Yangtze River Delta Region in China as an Example

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors stated a general idea as the basis for the research they conducted. However, there is room for improvement in this area. In the introduction section, the connection with existing studies, the research gap and the research objective should be described in detail.

The applied methodology has its own consistency for the most part. On the other hand, the authors did not specify in the Method section how they generated the presented index. What is the theoretical basis? What elements have been used in previous studies? What are the similarities and differences compared to previous studies?

In the discussion, it is necessary to state the applicability of the model in a wider context. The best validation of the applied model could be achieved through comparative analysis. This should be part of the discussion.

The list of references should be improved by adding new relevant sources.

 

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in green on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

  

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 1

1. The authors stated a general idea as the basis for the research they conducted. However, there is room for improvement in this area. In the introduction section, the connection with existing studies, the research gap and the research objective should be described in detail.

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 48 and 62. The details are as follows:

With the expansion of the connotation of regional coordinated development, especially after the release of SDGs, the goals of regional coordinated development have begun to pay more attention to the dimensions of ecological civilization, health and well-being, and social equality. This has also made it possible and inevitable for different disciplines in geography to study regional coordinated development from different perspectives [7-8].

Based on continuing existing research results, this article will construct a regional coordinated and balanced development index system based on the guidance of SDGs, quantitatively measure the evolution process, stage characteristics, spatial pattern, and development trend of coordinated and balanced development of various cities in the YRD region, and divide several development types of areas according to spatial characteristics, proposing corresponding countermeasures and suggestions.

 

2. The applied methodology has its consistency for the most part. On the other hand, the authors did not specify in the Method section how they generated the presented index. What is the theoretical basis? What elements have been used in previous studies? What are the similarities and differences compared to previous studies?

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 186. The details are as follows:

The theoretical foundation of regional coordinated and balanced development originates from the theory of coordinated development and focuses on the prominent manifestations of regional imbalance and disharmony, as well as the reality of studying the vast territory, abundant resources, and complex and diverse regional situations. It integrates the orientation of SDGs, making it significantly different from other regional development models. On this basis, the scientific, applicability, reliability, objectivity, accessibility, comparability, and other aspects of data indicators were also considered, striving to reflect the concept and connotation of regional coordinated and balanced development in the process of indicator construction. Compared with previous research, the indicator system still retains traditional indicators such as people's living standards, basic public services, and industrial coordination, but adds new indicators such as human nature coordination, ecological beauty, and mechanism science.

 

3. In the discussion, it is necessary to state the applicability of the model in a wider context. The best validation of the applied model could be achieved through comparative analysis. This should be part of the discussion.

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 536. The details are as follows:

The insufficient and unbalanced regional development seriously restricts the improvement of the living environment and people's well-being, and also becomes a weakness in investment and business environment, reducing the sustainability of natural ecosystems. The use of the regional coordinated and balanced development model in other developing countries around the world can better reflect the regional development concept of "people-centered", that is, to achieve the same direction and basic step growth of human and ecological, social and economic benefits in the process of sustained economic growth.

4. The list of references should be improved by adding new relevant sources.

Response: We have added new relevant sources into References.

 

We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and the reviewers for your comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

(i) The Introduction part needs to be elaborated for providing a more comprehensive justification of the main motivations, challenges, and contributions of this paper.

(ii) Section 2, research gap with the state of the art needs a clear representation.

(iii) The indicator system construction part, indicators from three aspects are listed in Table 1. Authors should clarify whether these indicators belong to qualitative or quantitative indicators. For example, D28, D29 and D30. It is hard to distinguish them by the unit ‘Home’ and ‘individual’.

(iv) When introducing 3.2 Methods, equations are suggested to be numbered in order.

(v) Some parameters are not explained in the Gini coefficient calculation equation.

(vi) As there are so many methods used, for example, entropy value method, hierarchical cluster analysis, and local spatial autocorrelation. What role do they play in calculating the final ranking results.

(vii) Suzhou is a representative mega-city next to Key Development Area Shanghai. As Table 2 reveals, the reviewer wonders why Suzhou rank last among all the investigated cities. Authors are advised to provided related and rational descriptions.

Author Response

Thank you for your letter and for the comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in green on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 2

(i) The Introduction part needs to be elaborated to provide a more comprehensive justification of the main motivations, challenges, and contributions of this paper.

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 49 to 54 and Line 78-83. The details are as follows:

With the expansion of the connotation of regional coordinated development, especially after the release of SDGs, the goals of regional coordinated development have begun to pay more attention to the dimensions of ecological civilization, health and well-being, and social equality. This has also made it possible and inevitable for different disciplines in geography to study regional coordinated development from different perspectives [7-8].

Based on continuing existing research results, this article will construct a regional coordinated and balanced development index system based on the guidance of SDGs, quantitatively measure the evolution process, stage characteristics, spatial pattern, and development trend of coordinated and balanced development of various cities in the YRD region, and divide several development types of areas according to spatial characteristics, proposing corresponding countermeasures and suggestions.

 

(ii) Section 2, research gap with the state of the art needs a clear representation.

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 149. The details are as follows:

In summary, existing research has laid a solid foundation for the in-depth exploration of coordinated development in this article. However, the aforementioned research may focus on exploring its coordinated and balanced development from a theoretical perspective, or only conduct quantitative analysis from dimensions such as economic development, people's living standards, and basic public services. In the context of increasingly embodying the concept of "people-centered" sustainable development, relevant research lacks consideration of dimensions such as coordination between humans and nature, ecological beauty, and reasonable mechanisms. Therefore, there are also a few optimization paths proposed based on that.

 

(iii) The indicator system construction part, indicators from three aspects are listed in Table 1. Authors should clarify whether these indicators belong to qualitative or quantitative indicators. For example, D28, D29 and D30. It is hard to distinguish them by the unit ‘Home’ and ‘individual’.

Response: Translation problem. We have completed the modification. We also added a note under Table 2 for convenience of understanding.

 

(iv) When introducing 3.2 Methods, equations are suggested to be numbered in order.

Response: Thank you for your advice and we have finished it.

 

(v) Some parameters are not explained in the Gini coefficient calculation equation.

Response: We have supplemented relevant content under the Gini coefficient calculation equation. The details are as follows:

G、μ represent the Gini coefficient and the expected coordinated balanced development index of each group, respectively; N represents the observed value; y_i and y_j respectively represent the coordinated and balanced development index of cities i and j.

 

(vi) As there are so many methods used, for example, the entropy value method, hierarchical cluster analysis, and local spatial autocorrelation. What role do they play in calculating the final ranking results?

Response: We have supplemented the role of each method in the article separately in each method section. The details are as follows:

223 In the entropy method section, the main function of this method is to calculate the index scores for each dimension of each city in the Yangtze River Delta region and summarize them to obtain the corresponding city's coordinated and balanced development index.

259 In the local spatial autocorrelation section, the main function of this method is to identify urban spatial agglomeration conditions with different levels of coordinated and balanced development.

272 In the hierarchical cluster analysis section, the main function of this method is to divide several development types based on the coordinated and balanced development index of all cities.

 

(vii) Suzhou is a representative mega-city next to the Key Development Area Shanghai. As Table 2 reveals, the reviewer wonders why Suzhou ranks last among all the investigated cities. Authors are advised to provide related and rational descriptions.

Response: Thank you for your advice and we have improved it.

In Table 2, "Su’zhou" in the last does not refer to the well-known Suzhou near Shanghai, but to a prefecture-level city in Anhui Province. Due to the inability of English to distinguish between tones, a " ' " has been added to the first word of the city to indicate differentiation, causing misunderstanding in comprehension. The author apologizes for that. An explanation has been added to the end of Table 2. The second-ranked "Suzhou" in the table refers to the major city near Shanghai, while the last-ranked "Su'zhou" refers to a prefecture-level city near Xuzhou in Anhui Province.

 

We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and the reviewers for your comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find the attachment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required!

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in green on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 3

Recommendations

- to place the results in a broader context of analysis;

- to mention the limitations of the analysis and future research directions.

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 566-574. The details are as follows:

Due to limitations in research depth and data collection, this article still has shortcomings in research scale, indicator system construction and spatial analysis methods. Specifically, the study is based on prefecture-level cities as the basic research unit, resulting in relatively rough study precision; the scientificity of the indicator system construction still needs to be further improved and it needs further alignment with the SDGs; spatial analysis methods are relatively traditional and lack more spatial correlation analysis. To this end, further research in the future needs to be approached from three aspects: first, to further refine the research units to the district level; second, to introduce more relevant indicators of SDGs, and continuously optimize the existing indicator system; and third, to introduce kernel density models and hot spot analysis to enrich the means of spatial analysis.

 

We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and the reviewers for your comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The reviewed article addresses an important issue from both theoretical and practical perspectives. The authors have proposed an interesting methodological approach, although it is advisable to do some revises:

1. The abstract should be rephrased. In this section, the authors should briefly outline the motivation for the research and research background. The article's purpose, research method, data, results outline, and main contribution must be given in the abstract.

2. In the literature review, the concept of coordinated and sustainable regional development should be described in more detail – this will allow for a better justification of the selection of indicators for analysis (currently, such justification is lacking).

3. In the set of indicators (e.g., Basic Public Services), one of the most fundamental public services – education - has not been considered – What was the reason for this?

4. The methodological chapter needs to explain the purpose of the individual methods. Supplementing this information would allow for a better understanding of the issues presented in section 4.3. 'Regional Regulation Priorities for the YRD Region in the Future'.

5. The discussion needs to meet the requirements of a scientific study. In this part of the article, the authors should assess and critique the findings and/or the statistical analysis and compare their findings to the findings of other authors. The information regarding the situation in the YRD should be placed in the introduction to provide context for the conducted analysis.

6. The text contains general statements that need further clarification. For example, line 130: 'high-quality regional development' - what exactly does this mean?; line 219: Which specific institutions are covered by the term 'authoritative institutions'?; line 220: 'For some missing data, this study adopts (…) and other ways to deal with them' – what specific methods were used to determine the values of missing indicators?

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in green on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

 

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 4

1. The abstract should be rephrased. In this section, the authors should briefly outline the motivation for the research and research background. The article's purpose, research method, data, results outline, and main contribution must be given in the abstract.

Response: We have improved the abstract from line 9-18. The details are as follows:

In recent years, the problem of unbalanced and insufficient development in the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region has become increasingly prominent, posing higher requirements for regional coordinated development. Based on elucidating the connotation of balanced development of regional coordination, this article constructs an evaluation index system for the balanced development of regional coordination in the YRD region from 12 dimensions such as people's living standards, basic public services, and beautiful ecology. It attempts to quantitatively reveal the level of balanced development of regional coordination in the YRD region in 2020 and optimization strategies using mathematical models such as the entropy method, spatial autocorrelation and Gini coefficient, which has important value for clarifying the inherent contradictions in the balanced development of regional coordination in this region and promoting regional sustainable development.

 

2. In the literature review, the concept of coordinated and sustainable regional development should be described in more detail – this will allow for a better justification of the selection of indicators for analysis (currently, such justification is lacking).

Response: We have improved this section and supplemented relevant content on Line 105-114. The details are as follows:

The connotation of "coordination" involves the four key areas of industrial, urban, social, and human-nature relationships for regional development. The connotation of "balance" is the three major goals proposed by the Chinese government: "striving to achieve equal access to basic public services, relatively balanced access to infrastructure, and roughly equivalent guarantees of people's basic living standards." The connotation of "integration" is based on General Secretary Xi Jinping's requirement to "build the Yangtze River Economic Belt (including the YRD region) into a golden economic belt that is more ecologically beautiful, with smoother transportation, more coordinated economy, more unified market, and more scientific mechanisms."

 

3. In the set of indicators (e.g., Basic Public Services), one of the most fundamental public services – education - has not been considered – What was the reason for this?

Response: The question you raised is very valuable. In the early stage of constructing the index system, there was indeed an education-related indicator, that is, the number of primary and secondary school students per 10,000 people. However, in the subsequent analysis, it was found that it had a strong collinearity with the per capita disposable income of urban and rural residents and the number of books in public libraries per 10,000 people, and did not pass the significance test. Therefore, this indicator was removed. At the same time, considering that the YRD region is one of the most developed regions in China, its educational level is at the forefront of the whole country, and the difference of this indicator is relatively small, which has little impact on the measurement of the overall coordinated and balanced development level.

Of course, education has always been one of the most important components of basic public services for citizens. We will fully incorporate your suggestions in the subsequent in-depth research, and supplement relevant education indicators in the index system to make the research results more scientific.

 

4. The methodological chapter needs to explain the purpose of the individual methods. Supplementing this information would allow for a better understanding of the issues presented in section 4.3. 'Regional Regulation Priorities for the YRD Region in the Future'.

Response: We have supplemented the purpose of each method in the article separately in each method section. The details are as follows:

223 In the entropy method section, the main function of this method is to calculate the index scores for each dimension of each city in the Yangtze River Delta region and summarize them to obtain the corresponding city's coordinated and balanced development index.

259 In the local spatial autocorrelation section, the main function of this method is to identify urban spatial agglomeration conditions with different levels of coordinated and balanced development.

272 In the hierarchical cluster analysis section, the main function of this method is to divide several development types based on the coordinated and balanced development index of all cities.

 

5. The discussion needs to meet the requirements of a scientific study. In this part of the article, the authors should assess and critique the findings and/or the statistical analysis and compare their findings to the findings of other authors. The information regarding the situation in the YRD should be placed in the introduction to provide context for the conducted analysis.

Response: We first moved the second paragraph of the Discussion section to the third paragraph of the Introduction section. And supplemented the evaluation of the results and their comparison with other related studies.

The development of the region is experiencing a dynamic process of "low-level equilibrium → imbalance → high-level equilibrium", with a continuous spiral rise in the contradictions of equilibrium and imbalance, coordination and lack of coordination. The imbalances and lack of coordination in China's regional development are the spatial projection of the principal contradictions in the new era of our country, and the evaluation of the typical regional coordination and balanced development level in China has important implications for similar regions worldwide. The level of coordinated and balanced development of the YRD region in 2020 was evaluated from 12 dimensions such as the people's living standards, industrial coordination, and smooth transportation. It shows the prominent advantages of the apparent improvement in the ecological environment, sustained and healthy economic development, and accelerated construction of comprehensive transportation channels, while also exposing significant contradictions such as the region's still significant ecological and environmental pressure, significant differences in economic development stages, and the need for further optimization of industrial structure. These research results, compared with other similar studies, further validate the stage and level of coordinated development of the Yangtze River Delta region. They also present the current situation and issues of the research area from a more detailed perspective [36-37]. This may also be a major innovation of this article.

 

6. The text contains general statements that need further clarification. For example, line 130: 'high-quality regional development' - what exactly does this mean?; line 219: Which specific institutions are covered by the term 'authoritative institutions'?; line 220: 'For some missing data, this study adopts (…) and other ways to deal with them' – what specific methods were used to determine the values of missing indicators?

Response: We greatly appreciate the valuable questions raised by the reviewer, and have made the following modifications to the questions raised.

For line 171, we added a footnote. High-quality regional development is an important goal of coordinated regional development and an important aspect of promoting Chinese-style modernization. It includes the stability of growth, the balance of development, and the sustainability of the environment, which are highly consistent with coordinated regional development.

For line 283, we added a footnote. Other authoritative institutions include the ecological and environmental departments, transportation departments, and labor and social security departments of various provinces and cities in the YRD region.

For line 283, the expression is not accurate. We modified the sentence as follows: For some missing data, this study adopts multi-year regression or interpolation to deal with them.

 

We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and the reviewers for your comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely,

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No comments.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

  Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in yellow on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 1

No comments.

Thank you to the reviewer for recognizing the revised content of the paper.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. 

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely!

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors have well addressed my comments and made sufficient improvements. Thus, this paper can be accepted.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in yellow on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 2

Authors have well addressed my comments and made sufficient improvements. Thus, this paper can be accepted.

Thank you to the reviewer for recognizing the revised content of the paper.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely!

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors addressed all comments from the previous review and changed the text. However, the Discussion section should be more specific. Although the Authors refer to the results of other studies, the excerpt: "These research results, compared with other similar studies, further validate the stage and level of coordinated development of the Yangtze River Delta region. They also present the current situation and issues of the research area from a more detailed perspective (…)" (lines 543-546) is too general. It is necessary to specify the subject matter of the cited studies and to what extent the article's results confirm their findings. It is also essential to consider the compatibility or divergence of research methods, etc.

Author Response

Dear Editors and Reviewers:

Thank you for your letter and for the reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Multidimensional Measurement and Regulation of Regional Coordinated and Balanced Development Levels: The Yangtze River Delta Region China as an Example” (ID: sustainability-2769969). Those comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our research. We have studied comments carefully and have made corrections which we hope meet with approval. The revised portions are highlighted (The corrections we made are marked in yellow on the paper). The main corrections in the paper and the responses to the reviewer’s comments are as follows:

Responds to the reviewer’s comments:

Reviewer 4

1.The Authors addressed all comments from the previous review and changed the text. However, the Discussion section should be more specific. Although the Authors refer to the results of other studies, the excerpt: "These research results, compared with other similar studies, further validate the stage and level of coordinated development of the Yangtze River Delta region. They also present the current situation and issues of the research area from a more detailed perspective (…)" (lines 543-546) is too general. It is necessary to specify the subject matter of the cited studies and to what extent the article's results confirm their findings. It is also essential to consider the compatibility or divergence of research methods, etc.

Response: Thank you to the reviewer for providing further revision suggestions. We have improved this section and supplement relevant content on Line 532-548.The details are as follows:

The results of our article are more comprehensive and in-depth compared to previous studies that used a single index methodology. While confirming existing conclusions, they showcase the level of regional coordinated development from a broader perspective. For example, Luo et al. used the ratio of the land expansion rate to the population growth rate as the coordination degree [36]. Ye et al. used Location quotients and industrial structure similarity coefficients as the regional coordinated development ability [37], both of which presented the level and evolution of coordinated development in the YRD region from a single perspective. Of course, many studies have also used a comprehensive index methodology to evaluate the level of coordinated development in the YRD region, but the research perspective is mostly centered on resources, industries and population [38], with less attention paid to the connection with the SDGs. This paper, based on fully considering the existing research index system and the SDGs, constructs a coordinated and balanced development index for the YRD region. It not only reflects the coordinated development level in traditional research dimensions such as industrial development, social progress, ecological environment and infra-structure, but also further reflects the coordinated development level in SDGs dimensions such as poverty eradication, health and well-being, and harmonious coexistence between humans and nature.

Thank you to the reviewer for recognizing the revised content of the paper. And we have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely!

Lei Ye

Corresponding author: Guiling Wang