OUV Analysis and Global Comparative Study of Karakoram-Pamir World Natural Heritage Potential Area

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a data-based assessment of the Pamir Plateau, known as the "Spring Ridge", with the world's largest mountain junction - Pamir mountain junction, which is known as the ancestor of mountains and the source of 13 rivers. The essay is well argued with a comparison of other major parks which have achieved World Heritage Listing due in part to Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). The research assumes that if the proposal WH area is similar to other WH areas that are listed, then this argues for its listing. The detailed comparison does make this point. Remaining to be discussed and perhaps beyond the scope of this paper is the cultural heritage of the area. the phrase above Ancestor of Mountains is a clear indicator that people for very long periods have perceived this area as alive and spiritual and thus a part of their heritage. The argument for listing could be strengthened if the cultural heritage component was also considered. Still it is a high-quality piece of research and analysis on an important topic and should be published.

Author Response

Dear Experts.
Thank you very much for the recognition of my thesis.

This paper summarizes the World Natural Heritage values and evaluation models of the Karakorum-Pamir Potential Area, demonstrating that it has outstanding universal value as a World Natural Heritage site. However, a review of the cultural heritage values of the Karakorum-Pamir Potential Area and a global comparative study are also important in terms of the integrity of heritage values. The Karakorum-Pamir Potential Area is not only of outstanding universal value as a natural heritage site but also of unique cultural heritage value, as the southern and central routes of the ancient Silk Road converge at Karakorum-Pamir, which was a major transportation hub along the ancient Silk Road. In addition, Xinjiang has been a multi-ethnic region since ancient times, and its historical background is unique, so the selection of objects for global comparison needs to be considered repeatedly. Due to the above factors and space considerations, the author has included the cultural heritage values of the Karakorum-Pamir potential area in a subsequent paper, to make the comparison of values more complete and comprehensive.

I have included this section in the final discussion section of my paper.
Once again, I would like to thank you sincerely for your guidance on my dissertation.

Ruiyao Xu

2022.09.22

Reviewer 2 Report

The methodology is based on a qualitative comparative analysis. It compares the case study with 15 other examples according to the given criteria. However, the large number of example choices makes in-depth analysis difficult. For this very reason, the examination becomes very list-like and gives an overly rough picture. Qualitative adjectives and ratings are commonplace in many places. (eg breathtaking, beautiful) This does not allow meaningful comparison. For this reason, from a methodological point of view, it would be necessary to rethink the analysis, perhaps to contextualize it with fewer examples but with a deeper explanation.

At the beginning of the study, the research question and hypothesis were not clearly articulated. The question and the hypothesis should be formulated more plastically at the beginning of the paper. This question should not only refer to the classification of the studied region. It would be important for the research to formulate a methodological or evaluation conclusion and experience beyond the case study nature of the study. To what extent can this case study be a model for further research?

All of this must be stated in the conclusion at the end of the paper. It would be worthwhile to separate the conclusion and the results. The results, which are now summarized in points in the conclusion, should be placed in a separate results chapter. The conclusion should include lessons learned, methodological experiences and conclusions from the results.

Author Response

Dear Experts,

Thank you very much for the valuable comments you have given me on my thesis. It has made me realize the shortcomings of my thesis.

I have made the following changes in response to your comments.

1. Removed some of the qualitative words, such as breathtaking.
2. Restate the background and hypothesis of the research question in the Introduction section of the essay.
3. In the methodological process, the geographical comparison method has been replaced by the expert scoring method, and a model for comparing the value of large mountain natural world heritage sites has been developed, in which typical global extreme alpine heritage sites are scored by experts, and weighted and ranked according to their scores.
4. The removal of three World Heritage sites with different landscapes, namely Mount Nunda Davey National Park and Valley of Flowers National Park, Grand Canyon National Park and Great Smoky Mountains National Park, from the global comparison described in the results brought the number of 17 global comparison cases to 14.
5. Separate the results of the paper from the discussion, with the results containing the ranking of the comparisons, the results of the comparative analysis, and the conclusions including a summary of the heritage value comparison methodology and the heritage value determination.

Ruiyao Xu

2022.09.22

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I accept revisions and amendments.