Does Adding Local Tree Elements into Dwellings Enhance Individuals’ Homesickness? Scenario-Visualisation for Developing Sustainable Rural Landscapes

Submission

Round  1

Reviewer  Report

Very interesting paper joining social, humanistic and formal levels of cultural landscape research.

Abstract is clear and reflects the content of the paper, but sometimes it is quite insufficient. I mean “mental shortcuts”, like in lines 24-26. It looks like you wanted to search emotional factors in the Photoshop.

I very like the Introduction. Despite being really long it has hot appropriate structure and it is very interesting. The authors use all references I wanted to see in the topic. Literature review is just perfect, and after that so humble scheme (Fig. 1). Please consider developing it, showing what features appear on the overlaying parts of the figure.

The purpose and scope of the work is properly and comprehensively presented, as well as part of methods. I rate very highly the way of determining the weight of elements and reliable implementation of results on particular levels of the study. The Idea of participation od stakeholders is also very valuable. It looks they are only students. Maybe it is worth to mention about it in the Abstract?

Results are presented clear and correctly. Maybe cluster analysis graphics could be more readable (on the copy it is deep grey with really thin lines).

Discussion is really interesting and dividing it into section makes argument easy to  understood. Maybe The authors could develop reference to Relf , explaining clearer what “cold material space’ exactly means.

Conclusion also seems to be well done, answering points signalised in the Introduction.

Congratulations!

Re-submission

Round  1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no comments. The authors made the suggested improvements to the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

I still very appreciate the paper, which is valuable contribution for cultural landscape research. Abstract is clear and reflects the content of the paper, having clear structure and referring broad background of the merit. This version of the paper is more based on the research data analysis, underlining process of collecting data and making it more clear. I like it very much and I dare suppose it is very good example of interesting method of comparing quantitative and qualitative side of landscape research. Conclusion also seems to be well done, answering points signalised in the Introduction.

Changing title was I think good decision, underlining a essence of the research.