While the authors present an important contribution by empirically linking government environmental governance and public environmental concern to energy transition dynamics in China, a significant methodological concern remains unaddressed. The study operationalizes energy transition (ENR) using a single proxy: the ratio of total energy consumption to GDP (energy intensity). However, energy intensity alone does not adequately capture structural shifts towards renewable energy sources or decarbonization, which are central to any genuine “energy transition.”
Numerous studies have shown that declining energy intensity can result from improved fossil fuel efficiency, without necessarily reflecting a shift towards clean energy (e.g., electrification or renewable integration). By relying solely on ENR = energy/GDP, the analysis risks conflating energy efficiency improvements with actual energy source transitions, undermining the study’s capacity to substantiate claims about a sustainable energy future.
Can the authors justify their reliance on this single metric, and clarify how they ensured that the observed trends reflect a transition in energy composition rather than merely improved energy productivity?