Suburban Residents’ Preferences for Livable Residential Area in Finland

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1 The aim of the paper or the hypothesis are not clearly formulated at the end of the introduction

2 A description of the area would be useful

3.1 Is the sample representative? How was it selected?
The presentation of the whole population would be useful.

5 What should further research focus on?

General comment. Additional photos would be helpful to understand what type of area is involved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear  Authors many thanks for choosing this journal; the topic illustrated is very interesting with excellent prospects for development.

We recommend, if possible, 2 changes:

-we propose to re-evaluate the keyword "preference", in "participative process"

- line 110, is it possible to insert a map with the location of the study area ?

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article entitled “Suburban Residents' Preferences for Liveable Residential Area in Finland” is been written nicely and according to the scope of Sustainability. However, before a final publication, it requires a Major Revision.

1. There should be liveable in title not livable.
2. No need to write background sentences in the abstract. You should directly start the abstract from the main objective of the article.
3. The abstract should be written in a smooth paragraph rather than providing numbering.
4. You should provide a short paragraph in the introduction that can explain the scenario of Preferences for Liveable Residential Area in Nordic countries and then discuss a situation in Finland. If you can do this, it will be worth mentioning in the introduction.
5. Understanding the research methodology would be facilitated by a flow chart
6. The heading of section 3 should be replaced with Results
7. Limitations of the study should be provided in the conclusion section.
8. Recommendation for a future study should be proposed at the end of the conclusion.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Authors have address all of my comments and the quality of paper has been improved. Therefore, I request to Associate Editor to consider it for publication in its current form.