The impact of environmental regulation on regional economic growth: A case study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China

Jiajun He; Zirui Huang; Xin Fan; Hui Zhang; Rong Zhou; Mingwei Song

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290607

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionMay 30, 2023
4 Jul 2023 Decision Letter - Najabat Ali, Editor PONE-D-23-16688The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Regional Economic Growth: a Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, ChinaPLOS ONE Dear Dr. Zhang, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process. Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 18 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter. If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Najabat Ali, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "Thanks to financial support from the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities and the National Natural Science Foundation of China." We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: "This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662022ZHYJ004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (40971054)." Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662022ZHYJ004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (40971054)." Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. 4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability. "Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized. Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access. We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter. 5. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ 6. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author Mingwei Song. 7. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files [Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.] Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Partly Reviewer #2: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: PONE-D-23-16688 Title: The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Regional Economic Growth: a Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China. Comments: I have completed the review process of the article entitled " The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Regional Economic Growth: a Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China.". The following comments might further improve the quality of the paper. 1. In the introduction, the theoretical and technical information between is not given. The subject is covered with general statistics and rankings. If variables are added to the model for analysis, their theoretical and technical connections and background should be explained. Otherwise, every desired variable should not be added to the model. In addition, the channels through which these explanatory variables affect the dependent variable should be explained. 2. The gap in the literature should be explained in detail and the importance and contribution of the study should be clearly stated. The literature review section is thin with respect to the major study areas, it is required substantial improvement. 4. There are many papers cited in the methodology with any logical reason. Add some advantages of the methods, by citing them with reference to the previous studies that make sense. 3. While presenting the empirical results, the study should focus to compare the results obtained and the results of previous studies, and discuss the differences discovered. Are there any other studies in the literature that found similar results? Do the findings overlap with only one study? 4. Conclusion restates the findings, which is inappropriate. It is recommended that authors use no more than three sentences to sum up the findings. More importantly, the policies are extremely ambiguous and appear to have been predetermined by the authors before the study was even started. The policy recommendations should follow logically from the presentation of the findings and not add anything new. 5. I also think that the study needs proof and editing. I would recommend checking it especially in terms of typo errors. Reviewer #2: I congratulate the authors for a significant contribution in the field and therefore I recommend the manuscript for publication in its current form. I hope, the authors will continue their efforts to make contribution in their field in future. ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No ******** [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290607.r001
Revision 1
21 Jul 2023 Author Response Journal Requirements 1 Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. Reply: We have modified the manuscript as the journal’s requirements. 2 Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: "Thanks to financial support from the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities and the National Natural Science Foundation of China." We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: "This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662022ZHYJ004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (40971054)." Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf Reply: Thank you for your kindly reminder. We have removed the acknowledgments and the Funding. The Funding Statement reads as follows: "This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662022ZHYJ004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (40971054)." 3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: "This research was funded by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2662022ZHYJ004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (40971054)." Please state what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf. Reply: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." 4. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability. "Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized. Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access. We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter. Reply: Data Availability statement has been revised. The DOIs is: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23702052 5.PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ Reply: Thank you for your kindly reminder. The ORCID iD has been updated. It is: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9633-0201 6. Please amend the manuscript submission data (via Edit Submission) to include author Mingwei Song. Reply: Thank you for your kindly reminder. The manuscript submission data has been revised. 7. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files Reply: Thank you for your kindly reminder. The manuscript submission data has been revised. Reviewers’ comments Reviewer #1: 1.In the introduction, the theoretical and technical information between is not given. The subject is covered with general statistics and rankings. If variables are added to the model for analysis, their theoretical and technical connections and background should be explained. Otherwise, every desired variable should not be added to the model. In addition, the channels through which these explanatory variables affect the dependent variable should be explained. Reply：Thank you for your comment. We have added theoretical and technical information about both in the introduction. In Part 3.2, we explain the theoretical and technical connections and backgrounds of the variables, and explain the channels through which these explanatory variables affect the dependent variables 2. The gap in the literature should be explained in detail and the importance and contribution of the study should be clearly stated.The literature review section is thin with respect to the major study areas, it is required substantial improvement. Reply：Thank you for your comment. We have made a large number of revisions to the literature review, deleted the literature with repetitive content, not distinctive features or not closely related to the theme, and explained the characteristics, differences and contributions of the literature. The importance of this research is also pointed out 3. While presenting the empirical results, the study should focus to compare the results obtained and the results of previous studies, and discuss the differences discovered. Are there any other studies in the literature that found similar results? Do the findings overlap with only one study? Reply：Thank you for your comment. We compared the results of this study with other studies that came to similar conclusions. The differences and their causes are pointed out 4. Conclusion restates the findings, which is inappropriate. It is recommended that authors use no more than three sentences to sum up the findings. More importantly, the policies are extremely ambiguous and appear to have been predetermined by the authors before the study was even started. The policy recommendations should follow logically from the presentation of the findings and not add anything new. Reply：Thank you for your comment. We cut out the unnecessary content of the research conclusion, and put forward the suggestion that is closely related to the conclusion of this study 5. I also think that the study needs proof and editing. I would recommend checking it especially in terms of typo errors. Reply：Thank you for your comment. We checked the article and corrected the words and punctuation in question firstly Reviewer #2: I congratulate the authors for a significant contribution in the field and therefore I recommend the manuscript for publication in its current form. I hope, the authors will continue their efforts to make contribution in their field in future. Reply：Thanks very much for your kindly comment. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Detailed Response to Reviewer.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290607.r002
14 Aug 2023 Decision Letter - Najabat Ali, Editor The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Regional Economic Growth: a Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China PONE-D-23-16688R1 Dear Dr. Zhang, We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication. An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. Kind regards, Najabat Ali, Ph.D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290607.r003
Formally Accepted
30 Aug 2023 Acceptance Letter - Najabat Ali, Editor PONE-D-23-16688R1 The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Regional Economic Growth: a Case Study of the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China Dear Dr. Zhang: I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access. Kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Najabat Ali Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290607.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .