A Decision Support Tool for Green Infrastructure Planning in the Face of Rapid Urbanization

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper used qualitative study methods, and geospatial analysis to investigate the green space provision in Pretoria, South Africa. Focusing on urban planning practices, the paper developed a decision-supporting tool to facilitate urban planners evaluating the green space needs among different city areas. In general, the background studies were discussed well, the methodology was clear, the data was rich, and the results were discussed well. It is recommended to publish after the following improvements:

1) the authors need to double-check some of the terms used in the paper, such as "grey housing provision"

2) it is recommended the authors restructure the paper into introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussions and conclusion order. Currently, the literature is mixed with the introduction, it isn't easy to pick up the research targets and researcher questions

3) it is recommended to add a location map to showcase the location of the city with geographic boundaries to help readers gain context

4) some of the format issues need to be corrected, e.g. the location of the figures and tables. Please move them close to where they were cited.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the time taken to review our manuscript. The review has improved the quality of the paper and we have incoporated suggestions into the revisions. We have documented an item-by-item response in the attached table. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Congratulations on a well-written and substantively justified article that examines the socially significant problem of lack of access to green infrastructure in Tshwane, which is the largest Metropolitan Municipality in South Africa. What is particularly noteworthy is not just the material scope and diverse research methodology, but also the involvement of stakeholders.

It is worth mentioning that historic green areas also offer a number of cultural ecosystem services like cultural diversity, spiritual and religious values, educational values, inspiration, aesthetic values, sense of place or recreation and ecotourism (Hølleland yt al., 2017 or Pardela et. al. , 2022).

Lines 82-84: Global South. This, unless I’m mistaken, also includes China, where many projects related to the subject of the article may be conducted. This is worth checking out.

Lines 98-104: See also the State of Green Infrastructure in the Gauteng City-Region by Schäffler et al.

Line 256: Please specify when the workshop was held (the time frame, and this also applies to point 2.10). In addition, if I understood the authors correctly about the multi-stage social research they conducted, please specify the Internet platform where the online questionnaire was placed (if data on age, gender, education, ethnic group, religion, etc. were obtained – please specify)? Was only one language used
in the study? Were invitations to participate in the survey sent individually to selected people, or maybe only volunteers took part?

It is also worth specifying whether the number of the participants/stakeholders changed during the research, as well as how many participants did not complete the survey/gave up somewhere along the way. How many groups of 3 were there?
All this is aimed at possible replication of the research in the future. If possible, please consider including the content of the online questionnaire in the article.

Line 311. A trace of proofreading remains in point 3 (the letter "r" in the word “your”).

Line 340: Change 1.1. it's 4.1.

Technical note – please pay attention to the quality (resolution) of the diagrams, because in the reviewed file in pdf format some of them seem to be pixelated.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the time taken to review our manuscript. The review has improved the quality of the paper and we have incoporated suggestions into the revisions. We have documented an item-by-item response in the attached table. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is well written and it was very interesting to read the paper. Please consider the following comments to enhance the quality of the paper.

The authors need to put more effort into writing the introduction and introducing the problem that is being dealt with in the paper. The authors also need to write more about the research gaps and what way the current paper is attempting to fill in those research gaps.

Please complete a few issues:

* The aim of the paper should be more specific.

*Please explain in the paper the extent to which the developed paper can be relevant to the international scientific field.

*In conclusion, please indicate to what extent the proposed paper is innovative and what is its scientific contribution  for Green Infrastructure Planning

*In conclusion please motivate the formulation from the introduction of thesis the paper:

The methodology developed has upscaling potential for other cities and countries, and for comparison with tools developed for other countries at local scales.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for the time taken to review our manuscript. The review has improved the quality of the paper and we have incoporated suggestions into the revisions. We have documented an item-by-item response in the attached spreadsheet. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

The manuscript is well-written and fits well the general scope of Land. The topic of the study presented is interesting and it includes a novelty. 

The article is interesting, it presents an interesting case. The research area is Thswane metropolitan area in South Africa. Manuscript presented a decision support tool that is based on a green infrastructure benefit index and discussed its potential to support the decision-making process in the rapidly urbanizing context of the Global South.

In the introduction, the authors present the issues well.

Interesting observations, it's very good that this case was described: “For example, in Addis Ababa, GIS was used to model the 85 impact on green space from different future development densification scenarios and 86 showed that greater densities would help to protect the agricultural land at the urban 87 periphery, and prevent settlement along riverine corridors, but expose a greater number 88 of citizens to the risks associated with flooding [35].” The authors refer to other studies and cases in several places in the article, which is very good.

The purpose of the work was clearly presented. The research area is well described.

The chapter 2 is interesting. 

I appreciate the effort of organizing the workshops and the large research group.

Figures, charts and tables are properly prepared. 

Extensive literature (83), well prepared.

An interesting experiment of practical importance for landscape architects.

As a designer of green areas - I read the article with great pleasure, it is interesting and it is written in sound English.

To sum up - the research methods are correct. The conclusions were properly presented.

Yours sincerely, 

Reviewer.

Author Response

Thank you for the complimentary review. We are glad that you enjoyed it.