Determination of Empirical Environmental Indices for the Location of Cemeteries—An Innovative Proposal for Worldwide Use

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Greetings. I have found the manuscript acceptable for publication in its current form following editorial check. 

Best regards,

Ayaz

Author Response

REPLY TO REVIEWER# 1

1. I have found the manuscript acceptable for publication in its current form following editorial check. 
2. We are very pleased and thankful for the comment of this current reviewer, certainly an expert of the matter. We will continue working on this scientific topic and issues and we hope to realize further publications which may contribute plenty to the understanding of the phenomenon of the incidence of handling of corpses in the world.

Additionally, we may add that we performed language revisions throughout the scientific article.

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic is important and the paper represents a solid approach apply an existing technique but in my opinion some parts of article should be extended/improved. Please check the comments below.

How does the reviewed article relate to the article 'Proposal of an Initial Environmental Management and Land Use for Critical Cemeteries in Central Ecuador'?

Introduction - there is no information about conducted multi-criteria analysis in the aspect of cemeteries location so far. Worth mentioning are:

• Croucamp L., Richards N. 2002.  Guidelines for cemetery site selection 
• Dian Z. 2004. : Land for the Dead. Locating Urban Cemeteries, Case Study Guilin, China 
• Ismail N. et al. 2007. Site Selection for New Memorial Park using GIS: Muslim Memorial Park
• Lotfi S. et al. 2009. Integrating multi-criteria models and Geographical
  information system for cemetery site selection (a case study of the Sanandaj city, Iran)
• Judge R., 2012. Towards a methodology for identifying potential sites for cemeteries
• Długozima A., 2022. How to find a suitable location for a cemetery? Application of multi-criteria evaluation for identifying potential sites for cemeteries in Białystok, Poland
• Nguyen X.L. et al. 2019. Research on Optimal Cemetery Location Selection using Approach of Fuzzy Set Theory and Analytic Hierarchy Process in Environment of Geographic Information System: a Case Study in Hung Ha District, Thai Binh province. 

By including these publications in the introduction, a more objective discussion of the results will be possible.

With regard to the environmental assessment of the location of cemeteries, key studies on the subject are missing: Fisher 1992, Fisher and Croucamp 1993, Fisher 1994.

Methodology - it will be easier to understand the methodology if Authors describe how the paper is divided section. to better understand how this part has to be developed and use a flowchart to describe differente phases section

Very laconic 'Study area' section. What are the characteristics of Central Ecuador? Why are the sites only from this region? Whether the researched objects represent the entire cemetery resource in this area? Brief information about the 3 research sites would also be appreciated (maybe these 3 facilities could be marked on Figure 1?). 

It is confusing that the summary mentions the difficulty of finding a suitable location for cemeteries and the verification of the proposed method is done for existing cemeteries/ not for potential cemetery sites. 

In the environmental criteria for evaluating potential cemetery sites important indicators are also size, mortality rate (please check: Dian 2004, Judge 2012). Data on population density or the number of graves are more applicable to programming further development, determining the direction of development and the possible impact of the cemetery on the environment, but not necessarily when planning a new investment (lines 26-27). I regret that the variables of distances: to the historic center and to the green areas were rejected from the study. Maybe in Arcos (2022) they were ranked low, but if the authors had the ambition to develop a method for a worldwide use - which is evident from the title - they should have been included as well. Especially that in different parts of the world these indicators are weighted quite high (please check: Długozima 2022, Nguyen 2019, Rocque 2017, Shaker Ardekani 2015). 

Table 2 should be supplemented by a column with a scale o values, for better readability. 

The "category" in Table 4 corresponds to a scale values 1-5, where 5 means non-suitable?

According to information lines 101-106 the article should include more instructional information, e.g., where to obtain data for research to update public policies in the aspect of cemetery location? Maybe flowchart, guidelines/recommendations? Does this method have any limitations (software, knowledge, data)?

Minor errors in references - please check lines 43, 46, 70, 73, 116, 341-342.

References should be corrected according to 'Sustainability' guidelines.

Author Response

REPLY TO REVIEWER# 2

1. How does the reviewed article relate to the article 'Proposal of an Initial Environmental Management and Land Use for Critical Cemeteries in Central Ecuador?

R: Well, thanks for this comment and the opportunity to clarify this concern. The relationship between the requested article and the present one has been explained, as well as referenced throughout the manuscript. As example may serve the lines 74-76 as well as the lines 336 to 343

 

2. There is no information about conducted multi-criteria analysis in the aspect of cemeteries location so far

R: That is correct. The content of the introduction on multicriteria analysis was increased according to the reviewer's suggestions as demonstrated in the lines 100-116. In addition, we increased specific references as suggested by the reviewer.

 

3. it will be easier to understand the methodology if Authors describe how the paper is divided section. to better understand how this part has to be developed and use a flowchart to describe different phases section.

R: Good remark, absolutely accepted. An explanation was added to the methodology in a clear and concise manner. Check lines 130 – 136

 

4. Very laconic 'Study area' section. What are the characteristics of Central Ecuador? Lines 132-134 describe the main characteristics of Central Ecuador and this has been expanded with the answers to questions 5, 6, and 7.

 

5. Why are the sites only from this region?

The sites are exclusively from this region, therefore, this work constitutes the continuation of three previous works being Arcos 2020, Guayasamín 2021 and Flores 2022, in which studies have been performed in the Central Ecuador region. This has been clarified in references [44], [45], [46] as placed in line 136. It is also explained in lines 138 to 150.

 

6. Whether the researched objects represent the entire cemetery resource in this area?

R: Indeed, the objects investigated are representative of the areas identified as not suitable, moderately suitable, and completely suitable. In addition, they cover possible scenarios being good (adequate), medium and bad (Inadequate).

 

7. Brief information about the 3 research sites would also be appreciated.

R: Surely, obviously done as indicated from line 137 to 149

 

8. Maybe these 3 facilities could be marked on Figure 1? 

R: Thank you for this hint for improvement. In Figure 1, the Nanegal, Tumbaco and Calderon cemeteries were located with the letters A, B, and C for a quick identification.

 

9. It is confusing that the summary mentions the difficulty of finding a suitable location for cemeteries and the verification of the proposed method is done for existing cemeteries/ not for potential cemetery sites. 

R: We may accept this only partially. The work was developed based on installed cemeteries, since two of the variables that were considered for the hierarchical analysis were the number of graves and the age of the cemetery. The article presents a range of equations that spans from 3 to 10 variables that can be used for existing and future cemeteries, according to the information available. For the question raised by you, that is, a potential cemetery, equation No 6 should be used, as explained in the corresponding part of the text

 

10. In the environmental criteria for evaluating potential cemetery sites important indicators are also size, mortality rate (please check: Dian 2004, Judge 2012). Data on population density or the number of graves are more applicable to programming further development, determining the direction of development and the possible impact of the cemetery on the environment, but not necessarily when planning a new investment (lines 26-27). I regret that the variables of distances: to the historic center and to the green areas were rejected from the study. Maybe in Arcos (2022) they were ranked low, but if the authors had the ambition to develop a method for a worldwide use - which is evident from the title - they should have been included as well. Especially that in different parts of the world these indicators are weighted quite high (please check: Długozima 2022, Nguyen 2019, Rocque 2017, Shaker Ardekani 2015). 

R: We certainly agree with most of your comments and will clarify this part. The suggested bibliography focuses on the social part. However, the objective of this article is to obtain equations that evaluate the probability of environmental contamination and its mobility through the proper location of cemeteries.

Also, it was clarified that the developed equations are applicable for the evaluation of existing cemeteries, while the methodology is valid for existing and future cemeteries [lines 26-27 and 37-38].

The variables that are handled in the applied method of hierarchical analysis are a maximum of ten, which is why the distance to the historic center and protected areas are not relevant from the environmental point of view. The generation of environmental contamination and its mobilization is directly related to the variables that the panel of experts considered, being water table, distance from a body of water, precipitation, slope, type of soil, age of the cemetery, temperature, number of graves, fault geological, and population density.

 

11. Table 2 should be supplemented by a column with a scale of values, for better readability.  Due to the available space, when adding the requested column, visualization is lost and the information would be saturated. However, the scale was placed in Figure 1.

 

12. The "category" in Table 4 corresponds to a scale values 1-5, where 5 means non-suitable? Yes, absolutely correct, the number 5 means not suitable. The entire scale is described in lines 194-197, and is plotted in Figure 1.

 

13. According to information lines 101-106 the article should include more instructional information, e.g., where to obtain data for research to update public policies in the aspect of cemetery location? Maybe flowchart, guidelines/recommendations?  Indeed, good call, therefore the observation is handled involving the corresponding information on lines 123-126.

 

14. Does this method have any limitations (software, knowledge, data)? Certainly. The hierarchical method used has limitations since it handles TEN variables at the same time. This has been clarified in lines 169-170.

 

15. Minor errors in references - please check lines 43, 46, 70, 73, 116, 341-342. Thanks for this observations. All suggested lines have been checked and subsequently corrected.

 

16. References should be corrected according to 'Sustainability' guidelines. Indeed, sorry for that oversight. The guideline of Sustainability has been now fully respected.

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript reviser is interesting beecause the environments of cemeteries are considered as part of total and regional environemnts. But this fact is onle declared, but not deep and well discussed in the manuscript. I am confused that the term "eocsystem" or "terrestrial ecosystem" is not used. Also key references on soils and human remnannts of cemeteries from Eurasia are missed. E.g. works of Alexandrovskaya and Alexandrovskiy who used the remnants of kings for paleogeographical interpretation. Also new soil TYPEs exists in Russian soil classification - Nekrozems and Mortozes. No any lithological and hydrologcal predictors of environmental quality are discussed in terms of decomposition of organic mater ect. The key disadvantage of this work  is that sustainablity and environment are not discussed in tems of ecology. Also the suggestion for extrapolation of data obtained to other bioclimatic regions make me confused. Is it possible why precipitation and not rate with evaporation? why ecosystem services cpncept is not discussed in contenxt of "landscape as a space for life" theory? My general reccomendation to connect you data not only with empirical indicies, but, also with environmental, ecological and landscpae processes. 

Author Response

REPLY TO REVIEWER# 3

1. The manuscript reviser is interesting beecause the environments of cemeteries are considered as part of total and regional environemnts.But this fact is only declared, but not deep and well discussed in the manuscript. R. Absolutely correct. The discussion was deepened by referring to the multicriteria analysis used, as well as emphasizing the usefulness of the empirical indices obtained for the location of future cemeteries, even if there were changes in variables. Evidences that this has been done so in lines 400-407 and lines 501-502.

 

2. I am confused that the term "ecosystem" or "terrestrial ecosystem" is not used. Understandably. The word ecosystem was increased/introduced when environmental pollution and its impact are addressed. As shown in lines 28, 44,119 etc.

 

3. Also key references on soils and human remnannts of cemeteries from Eurasia are missed. E.g. works of Alexandrovskaya and Alexandrovskiy who used the remnants of kings for paleogeographical interpretation. This is a new aspect for us, and, to be clear an extremely interesting one for further studies of our research group, even if not so much for the given manuscript. The studies of older cemeteries and their paleogeographical interpretations opens the door wide open for a variety of new viewpoints. The works such as:

Alexandrovskaya, E. I., & Alexandrovskiy, A. L. (2000). History of the cultural layer in Moscow and accumulation of anthropogenic substances in it. Catena, 41(1-3), 249-259.

Alexandrovskiy, A. L., Dolgikh, A. V., & Alexandrovskaya, E. I. (2012). Pedogenetic features of habitation deposits in ancient towns of European Russia and their alteration under different natural conditions. Boletin de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana, 64(1), 71-77.

Alexandrovskiy, A. L., Alexandrovskaya, E. I., Zhilin, M. I., & van der Plicht, J. (2009). Mesolithic human bones from the upper Volga basin: radiocarbon and trace elements. Radiocarbon, 51(2), 637-645.

Alexandrovskaya, E. I., Alexandrovskiy, A. L., van der Plicht, J., Kovalyukh, N. N., & Skripkin, V. V. (2009). Monks and Icon Painters from the Spaso-Andronikov Monastery, Moscow. Radiocarbon, 51(2), 627-635, are an example of that what we might be able to do in the future in our study areas, as they were used and cited in line 137-140.

 

4. Also new soil TYPEs exists in Russian soil classification - Nekrozems and Mortozes. Thanks for this new and involved information. Nekrozems has been referred in line 173-175. Mortozes is rather still a yet unknown term for us.

Stroganova, M., & Prokofieva, T. (2001). Urban soils classification for Russian cities of the taiga zone. Soil Classification, 153-156.

Sukhacheva, E. Y., & Revina, Y. S. (2020). Medium-scale soil map of the Crimea southern coast. Eurasian Soil Science, 53(4), 397-404.

 

5. No any lithological and hydrological predictors of environmental quality are discussed in terms of decomposition of organic matter etc. Indeed and so true. This had been included, but apparently it has not been so obvious, as the detail of the behavior of the contamination in the water and soil matrices appears in lines 54-60 and 66 to 74.

Additionally, the applied method of Saaty, allows the interrelation of variables and with open access GIS software. It predicts the probability of environmental contamination of the existing cemeteries and therefore the probability of contamination of the analyzed area. Both of these have been clarified in the introduction lines 158-165.

The research team analyzed the Delphi method suggested by the reviewer, concluding that it is quite similar to Saaty's method. However, a parallel calculation cannot be carried out as the elaboration of the questionnaire, which is part of the Delphi methodology, should have been conducted from the beginning of the investigation and not after its end. This suggestion will be taken into account for the next phase of this research program regarding the evaluation of the forms of handling human corpses, being cremation and burial.

 

6. The key disadvantage of this work is that sustainability and environment are not discussed in terms of ecology. Unfortunately, we completely disagree in this point. The objective of the work has been to establish empirical equations that allow predicting the suitability of a place for the location of a cemetery and the probability of environmental contamination due to the decomposition of bodies. The suggestion of the reviewer is far outside of our reach and goals of the present study.

 

7. Also the suggestion for extrapolation of data obtained to other bioclimatic regions make me confused. R. We apologize for your confusion, being non-intentional from our side. The suggested extrapolation is considered in the equations obtained, hence its universal validity. The considered climatic variables are temperature and rainfall, which according to the panel of experts are the ones that would have the greatest impact on environmental pollution. Each bioclimate will have different temperature and rainfall values. However, the weight given to the variables will not change, which is implicit in the method used (Saaty).

 

8. Is it possible why precipitation and not rate with evaporation? Since evaporation theoretically constitutes a percentage of precipitation; its incidence is less in the mobilization of pollutants. On the other hand, the panel of experts also considered the incidence of evaporation, however, due to the ranking method used, which allows the use of 10 variables, evaporation had a minimum weight compared to those chosen for the analysis. The transport of contaminants generated by the decomposition of corpses could be from heavy metals, organic and inorganic matter, bacteria, viruses, leachate to radioactive elements, which, due to diffusion phenomena, hydraulic and mechanical dispersion, are transported to the ground, water and surface water bodies.

 

9. why ecosystem services concept is not discussed in context of "landscape as a space for life" theory? Great point. We though about this, but it would be again outside of the main goal and aspects of our present study, as we tried to quantify several variables for the optimal site of cemeteries leaving away social or philosophical contexts such as “landscape as a space for life" theory. Issues such as “The space of landscape and the space of geography” or “Space and place – two aspects of the human-landscape relationship” are fundamental for land use and planning and the simple coexistence of society and its environment as well as ecosystem, but its unfortunately far beyond the issue of our research.

 

10. My general recommendation to connect your data not only with empirical indices, but, also with environmental, ecological and landscape processes. Once again, we agree mostly with your point of view of the goals of our manuscript. However, the incidence of the objective of the work, are the empirical indices, and its incidence with the environment and ecology which have been extensively discussed throughout the text. The objective of the work was not visual pollution such as the corresponding landscape processes. Therefore, our research group considers that the visual pollution criterion should be considered for the next stage of the research program. This is not excluded, but rather postponed. We hope you understand and accept our decision.
    
    

Reviewer 4 Report

Reviewer’s comments to authors:

Title of the manuscript - “Determination of empirical environmental indices for the location of cemeteries – An innovative proposal for a worldwide use”

I have reviewed the manuscript entitled “Determination of empirical environmental indices for the location of cemeteries – An innovative proposal for a worldwide use”. The aim of this paper was to determine the suitable place to locate cemeteries in central Ecuador. The authors selected various parameters and used Saaty matrix for the same. The article presents an interesting topic. But the paper is not a quality work and there are many issues. So, I am not able to accept this paper:

My observation:

My main observation is that the authors are proposing a site suitability study and there is not spatial result that shows the best and worst site for cemeteries. The study should apply a novel GIS based methodology which may give a standard look and output.

Following are some of my other concern:

1. Your manuscript lacks a standard quality that is necessary for a publication.
2. The writing of the manuscript is poor, as reflected by:

(i) Redundant content in introduction;

(ii) Lack of in-depth analysis and discussion

(iii) No spatial analysis which is crucial

3. How many replicates were conducted for measurement of those parameters?

Thank you.

Author Response

REPLY REVIEWER# 4

1. I have reviewed the manuscript entitled “Determination of empirical environmental indices for the location of cemeteries – An innovative proposal for a worldwide use”. The aim of this paper was to determine the suitable place to locate cemeteries in central Ecuador. The authors selected various parameters and used Saaty matrix for the same. The article presents an interesting topic. But the paper is not a quality work and there are many issues. So, I am not able to accept this paper. Sorry to read this. However, the term “many issues” should include or followed by a list of these. Without a mention of which issues you are concerned about, we will be unable to respond properly.

 

2. My main observation is that the authors are proposing a site suitability study and there is not spatial result that shows the best and worst site for cemeteries.  Unfortunately, you may have overlooked most of the manuscript, as the whole text and even the data included in our empirical study demonstrate clearly the opposite of your comment, as also proved by the other four reviewers with expertise.

 

3. The study should apply a novel GIS based methodology which may give a standard look and output. Thank you, but once again, this has not been any of the main goals of our study. We can not include aspects outside of our main goals, which by the way are clearly expressed in the introduction.

 

4. Your manuscript lacks a standard quality that is necessary for a publication. Which are? That is curious as we regularly publish in the most prestigiously journals which includes “Sustainability” and no one has ever expressed such concern.

 

5. The writing of the manuscript is poor. You may help out with a few or many examples. We are unable to see them if you don´t express them in detail.

 

6. Redundant content in introduction. Thank you, this has been indeed the case, so we clarified that, as you are able to read in the new version of the manuscript.

 

7. Lack of in-depth analysis and discussion. Thank you for your opinion or point of or view of this part of the text. We may ask, what exactly do you mean with that. Well you know, a review should be constructive and pointed out criticism and we read the criticism, but we are unable to see what you mean if you don´t point out what we should change, add or leave out.

 

8. No spatial analysis which is crucial. Unfortunately, we agree to disagree. The whole point of our manuscript is to provide empirically a spatial analysis. May the reviewer has read a different manuscript.

 

9. How many replicates were conducted for measurement of those parameters?  All indicated in the text. You may read the part called methodology, as well as results and discussion, as it is stated their multiple times.

 

Generally, we wished more (any) details and a real review (at all) of such the advised reviewer. A general opinion is great, but unfortunately it doesn’t help much as a starting point for a potential improvement of our manuscript.

Reviewer 5 Report

Before definitively adopting this article, I would like the final text to take into account the following remarks and suggestions:

1. Authors should add a literature review section to highlight the seriousness of heavy metals and the role of cemeteries in the genesis of toxic heavy metals harmful to humans and the environment (contamination of surface and ground water, contamination of vegetation and contamination of floor) References: with the decomposition of coffins and bodies, these metals are released, contaminating soil, vegetation and groundwater (Aruomero and Afolabi 2014; Silva et al. 2018; Spongberg and Becks 2000). Motivated by the efforts of Costa et al. (2017), …………….this study aimed to quantify Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn, Al, Fe, and Mn concentrations in soils due to cemetery occupation in the Brazilian Amazon in order to assess the potential of environmental contamination Cited in B. P. D. SILVA et al.2019. Concentration of Heavy Metals in Soils under Cemetery Occupation in Amazonas, Brazil SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION https://doi.org/10.1080/15320383.2019.1696280 and A. Neckel et al., ‘Hazardous elements in the soil of urban cemeteries; constructive solutions aimed at sustainability’, 447 Chemosphere, vol. 262. Pergamon, p. 128248, Jan. 01, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128248.
2. For the location of cemeteries, in addition to the empirical environmental index, I suggest to also use GIS as a relevant tool for location and for global use: I suggest indicating it in the title and give the description for use GIS not just in line 163 Page 4
3. In addition to the Saaty method, I suggest to also use the Delphi method can be used in the selection of variables.

Author Response

REPLY REVIEW# 5

1. Authors should add a literature review section to highlight the seriousness of heavy metals and the role of cemeteries in the genesis of toxic heavy metals harmful to humans and the environment (contamination of surface and ground water, contamination of vegetation and contamination of floor) References: with the decomposition of coffins and bodies, these metals are released, contaminating soil, vegetation and groundwater (Aruomero and Afolabi 2014; Silva et al. 2018; Spongberg and Becks 2000). Motivated by the efforts of Costa et al. (2017), …………….this study aimed to quantify Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn, Al, Fe, and Mn concentrations in soils due to cemetery occupation in the Brazilian Amazon in order to assess the potential of environmental contamination Cited in B. P. D. SILVA et al.2019. Concentration of Heavy Metals in Soils under Cemetery Occupation in Amazonas, Brazil SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION https://doi.org/10.1080/15320383.2019.1696280 and A. Neckel et al., ‘Hazardous elements in the soil of urban cemeteries; constructive solutions aimed at sustainability’, 447 Chemosphere, vol. 262. Pergamon, p. 128248, Jan. 01, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128248.  That’s what a team of authors wish for, a constructive review and concern of a real expert when advising what is potentially missing in a manuscript. Thanks so much. Literature was added according to the correct suggestions of the reviewer. Aruomero and Afolabi 2014 (lines 67-70), Silva et al 2018 (lines 90-91), Neckel 2020 (lines 114-116), Sapongberg and Becks 2000 (lines 121-125), Costa et al 2017 (lines 60-62)

 

2. For the location of cemeteries, in addition to the empirical environmental index, I suggest to also use GIS as a relevant tool for location and for global use: I suggest indicating it in the title and give the description for use GIS not just in line 163 Page R. We accept this partially. The detail of the use of GIS in this investigation was added (lines 261-269). The title of the scientific article is not changed as the focus of the work is on obtaining the empirical indices.

 

3. In addition to the Saaty method, I suggest to also use the Delphi method can be used in the selection of variables.  The research team analyzed the Delphi method suggested by the reviewer, concluding that it is quite similar to Saaty's method. However, a parallel calculation cannot be carried out because the elaboration of the questionnaire, which is part of the Delphi methodology, should have been performed from the beginning of the investigation and not at the end. This suggestion will be absolutely considered for the next phase of this research program regarding the evaluation of the forms of handling human corpses, being cremation and burial.

 

 

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for expadning citation according to my reccomendations,

now papaer is better tha previous one.

But I still reccomend to think about the theory of ecosystems services in context of your interesting work

Reviewer 4 Report

In my previous review, I have focused on spatial analysis for site suitability. However, the authors did not positively response to my comments. Therefore, I am not able to accept this paper.

Thank you

Reviewer 5 Report

I am happy with the author's answers and I believe it is ready for publication!