Next Article in Journal
Preference Heterogeneity of Coastal Gray, Green, and Hybrid Infrastructure against Sea-Level Rise: A Choice Experiment Application in Japan
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Various Operating Conditions on Simulated Emissions-Based Stop Penalty at Signalized Intersections
Previous Article in Journal
From Waste Pickers to Producers: An Inclusive Circular Economy Solution through Development of Cooperatives in Waste Management
Previous Article in Special Issue
Bike Share Equity for Underrepresented Groups: Analyzing Barriers to System Usage in Baltimore, Maryland
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 13
Issue 16
10.3390/su13168926
Review Report
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

A GIS-CA Model for Planning Bikeways upon the Footpath Network

Sustainability 2021, 13(16), 8926; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168926
by Xu Zhao 1, Jie Zhang 2,*, Ning Zhang 3, Yiik Diew Wong 4, Yufang Zhou 1 and Meng Meng 5
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2021, 13(16), 8926; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168926
Submission received: 21 July 2021 / Revised: 5 August 2021 / Accepted: 8 August 2021 / Published: 10 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Transportation and Infrastructure Systems)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Previous theoretical background can be improved. Studies in New Zeland back in 2007 (https://viastrada.nz/sites/default/files/Cycle-network-GIS.pdf) or in Milwaukee City, WI, U.S.A in 2010 could be included if possible (https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.uwm.edu/dist/9/213/files/2016/06/2010a_AG-1bu9y61.pdf). Other methods could also be cited to show how diverse can be be the approach to this research topic.

2. Host variable values seem adequate and the four indicator variables can always be called into question but they also seem well chosen.

3. Data sources are actual. 

4. Algorithms seem to be well addressed and calculated as well as map algebra schematics. 

5. Digital cartography should be HIGHLY improved. 
There is NO context map, so for international researchers it is impossible to know the exact location of this study. North Arrow is missing (or other geographical orientation).  Legens has very poor quality but this could be only from on the PDF file and not on the original GIS maps.

6. It seems some of the figures are NOT aligned with the page as well as the text below them.

7. Conclusions are VERY Limited and do not transmit a clear message when it comes to findings and the adequacy of this methodology to this research field (bike-sharing paths).

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

My primary concern with the manuscript is the poor use of grammar. The MS is replete with such examples throughout. There are far too many for me to point out here so I suggest the manuscript be edited thoroughly by a professional editor before resubmitting. Second, the spatiotemporal analysis in GIS is not unique - indeed, it is widely used and the MS should acknowledge this by referencing such work. Third, how do the data base/layers relate (temporally) and what are the implications of using different temporal dimensions for the HIST and vehicle accident data?

Author Response

Please see the attachment. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The changes made based on my initial review are acceptable. Thanks.

Back to TopTop