How Does the Location of Urban Facilities Affect the Forecasted Population Change in the Osaka Metropolitan Fringe Area?
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The introductory background frames the case of Osaka and the Japanese planning system. No other case studies are cited that deal with the relationship between population and services/facilities (excluding citation n.2). This session must be implemented.
At line 51 the quality of services is mentioned but it is not explained why it is not taken into consideration in the study.
A broader description of the NA (line 65) may be useful. In other States, it does not exist and therefore it is not clear its purpose, its dimensions, the logic that establishes its perimeters, etc.
In paragraph 2, it may be useful to create a block diagram or a flowchart of the method (overall and/or by sub-paragraphs).
In paragraph 2 materials and methods too many things are taken for granted:
- what are the 53 indicators in line 113 (they are in the appendix but they are not indicated or even briefly described)
- what is R on line 114
- what is coefficient alfa in line 119
- The Bayesian network analysis is briefly described (lines 171-176) but after listing the data used (157-169). A list of the data after explaining the analysis would be desirable. The source of the method is not indicated.
There is a reversal to line 197: this is Figure 2 and not Figure 1.
Lines 232-239 are a discussion rather than an exposition of the results.
At line 355 the quote [29] does not coincide with the author it refers to in the text.
What is the coefficient r of line 335?
This statement "this study also found urban facilities like train stations cannot guide the location" (line 335-336) needs to be discussed more fully: there are many studies dealing with this issue. Particularly of the opposite idea: stations attract population and other types of services. An example is the theory of Transit Oriented Development (TOD).
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
I appreciate the reviewer for the generous comment on the manuscript. I have edited the manuscript according to the comments from editors and reviewers.
I believe that the manuscript is now suitable for publication in Sustainability and look forward to hearing from you concerning your editorial decision.
Yours sincerely
Haruka Kato
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The research question is original and well defined.
The results provide an interesting and very concrete proposal to define a long-term strategy for urban design, considering the statistical causal relationship between the locations of urban facilities and forecasted population changes. The paper presents a very clear but rich and complex methodology supported by data to analyze and empirical analysis.
The conclusions on the ideal locations of urban facilities in examinated residential clusters are is coherent with the formulation of an urban design strategy aimed to prevent a rapid population decline.
The article is written using a simple language and the use of the English language is very appropriate and understandable.
The issues addressed in the paper are of great interest to readers from different scientific fields and represent an excellent starting point for reflection on how to link urban planning choices to social needs.
The paper proposes work that can be further implemented but opens up interesting perspectives for the achievement of long-term goals.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
I appreciate the reviewer for the generous comment on the manuscript. I believe that the manuscript is now suitable for publication in Sustainability and look forward to hearing from you concerning your editorial decision.
Yours sincerely
Haruka Kato
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article discusses the dependency of population decline in urban areas related to the location of urban facilities. As study area, the Osaka metropolitan area, Japan, is used. As methodology, a Bayesian Network approach is used, based on a previous clustering and classification of urban city quarters.
The approach is very interesting and promising, giving some ideas about possible counter measures for urban planners to handle population decline in city quarters in the future.
On the other hand, due to the low correlation between the different factors in the final Bayesian Networks for different clusters, it is very hard to draw conclusions. As a general suggestion to the authors, it is recommended to formulate the conclusions more carefully. In particular, it is questionable that the influencing factors, respectively the correlation coefficients, differ so high between the different cluster. Here the significance of the results should be investigated in more details.
Some more detailed remarks:
- The abstract should include an introduction, the methodology and the results. The methodology is not mentioned at all in the abstract. So the reader of the abstract has no idea about the methodological approach of the study
- The literature review describing the state-of the-art is not really up-to-date, see e.g. Stadtumbau Ost. The German urban aid programme is integrated since several years with Stadtumbau West, and its goal was to secure and improve the quality of life, housing and work in East German cities and communities in the long term. Starting points were the strengthening of the inner cities and the preservation of old buildings, the reduction of vacant housing and the upgrading of cities affected by shrinking processes
- line 116: should be X xmin and not Xxminx
- line 157: … the fourteen GIS data…??? Unclear, was is meant by this
- line 197: check numbering of figures, should be figure 2???
- line 248 (figure 3): it is not clear what is shown on the map. According to the legend it is the predicted population density in 2040, according to the sub-title it is the population change ratio
- line 228: Check the reference Section 3.2, it is a self-reference, maybe 2.2?
- figures 5,6,7: the graphic corresponds not the legend: the edges don’t show any differences in thickness, no red colour is used
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
I appreciate the reviewer for the generous comment on the manuscript. I have edited the manuscript according to the comments from editors and reviewers.
I believe that the manuscript is now suitable for publication in Sustainability and look forward to hearing from you concerning your editorial decision.
Yours sincerely,
Haruka Kato
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The requested revisions have been carried out so, in my opinion, the paper is now publishable.
