Revealing Risk Stress on the Lanzhou Section of the Yellow River from the Industries alongside It
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Summary: This study analyses the risk factors presented to the Yellow River in Lanzhou.
Comments:
Overall, I do not see a clear contribution of your article. Is it a methodological breakthrough that employs both AHP and EW, which somebody has done before, or an applied piece of research that utilizes what other authors have invented to study a specific region, here, Lanzhou?
In general, I find grammatical mistakes in almost every paragraph, where active voice should be replaced by passive voice, and some terms that are neither found in the literature nor commonly seen in the English media. The authors should hire a native speaker to proofread their article and avoid direct translation of Chinese into English to avoid unnecessary confusion of the readers.
I think you need a more extensive literature review of AHP, EW, and the intersection of AHP and EW in greater detail, specifically highlighting how your method would serve to achieve the best of two worlds and how this synthesized method has been applied to multifaceted domains.
Please provide an English version of the details in Figure 1 to your reviewer. Thank you!
Line 21. What are “concrete” districts?
Line 23. Remove “5 factors that”.
Line 26. It’s uncommon to say etc in abstract. You either remove it or enumerate all.
Line 27. You do not hope anything in abstract, and I think the last sentence is redundant.
Line 33. What is domestic social-economy? I have never seen this term in the literature.
Line 35. Rewrite since you transport not just products but also raw materials and intermediate goods. Besides, “soar” is a word that represent enormous growth, which is not appropriate.
Line 38. Use active voice here.
Line 40. You do not use past tense if it continuously provides.
Line 43. If there are several incidents, they highlight.
Line 46. Deserves to be on whose agenda?
Line 53. Is inversely related.
Line 56. What is simple introducing sole method?
Line 57. Since the uncertainty and complexity of what?
Line 58. Why exactly not exact?
Line 60. What are the many deliverables those article mention?
Line 62. Is located at.
Line 64. What is filling in? Why not occupying?
Line 85. Honestly, I haven’t seen the word “eco-society”. Have you also defined GDP?
Line 86. Have you missed out a connective here?
Line 88. Do you mean water or aquatic environment?
Line 95. Why you mention “above designated size” again?
Line 96. What does Chen’s research stand for? Any ideas?
Line 98. Have you ever defined “water-related enterprises”?
Line 98. What are the “main” characteristics of the “main” industries?
Line 103. Do you mean “manufacturing” industry?
Line 106. How do you define “reasonable” request?
Line 116. Should read as “risk source”.
Line 119. Do you mean “put forward”?
Line 121. Do you mean “manufacturing technology”?
Line 123. that is, the type …
Line 125. , and we established …
Line 129. Please cite each and every “existing investigation and research” that you mentioned.
Line 130. Have you defined the concreteness of your indexes?
Line 134. You need to elaborate your data collection process, rather than shortening with etc.
Table 1. The spacing of your inequalities looks weird. Can you make all of them consistent? Besides, If D is exactly 1 (or 3), should it be assigned a value 4 or 3 (3 or 2), respectively? The same principle applies to indices C11, C12, and C13. Make sure that if you have strong inequality on one side, you have weak inequality on the other to ensure no overlapping.
Line 139. Can you italicize the index i?
Line 146. How to assess the “some” in the degree of objectiveness?
Line 148. Can you provide details of the ten experts that you hire?
Line 155. Whenever used as an index, n must be italicized.
Line 156. Do you mean “examine” not “exam”, and “flexibility” not “flexible”?
Line 166. m and n, same italicizations as above, and thereafter.
Line 180. Have you used the Chinese fonts for the parenthesis?
Line 200. “Gotten by” is informal. Use “obtained from”
Line 204. What is “APH” method?
Line 206. Should be “inclined to”.
Line 208. Have you conducted robustness checks to ensure no high-risk enterprises?
Line 222. that “are” usually given
Line 223. It is unclear to say “somewhat”.
Line 224. the “significantly” concerned factors
Line 225. “limiting” the influence
Line 226. Unclear on “prevention ability”.
Line 240. How come I count 6?
Line 243. What is “amount”? By size, business volume, no of establishments, or etc.? Besides, have you defined “medium-high” risks before? I only see “medium” or “high” previously.
Line 257. The saying of “another finding should be paid attention” is redundant because whatever you mention should be paid attention! So, double check for no redundant clutters. Also, “despite” is a connective followed with a noun phrase, and should never use a verb thereafter.
Line 258. Are you supposed to use a comma to connect the two sentences?
Line 260. Do you mean “all other” or “other all”?
Line 276. Have you defined “Lanzhou New Area” before?
Line 283. Why you capitalize “water” here?
Line 284. Do you mean “affect” or “be affected”?
Line 287. “Got” is informal. Use “attained” instead.
Line 288. Use passive voice “are located at”.
Line 290. Is it a typo in “alongside”?
Line 298. Use “present” not “were presented”.
Line 305. Informal to begin a sentence with “but”.
Line 311. Use “adjacent to” not “nearby”.
Line 321. They don’t deploy but “relocate to”.
Line 330. Why you have a dot after 64?
Line 339. Use “exhibited” not “showed”. Can you say “Figure 7 suggested that …”
Line 354. Can you add thousand-digit separator here similar to those in line 349?
Line 357? Can you name and cite the previous studies to which you refer?
Line 363. which is densely distributed …
Line 366. “present” not presenting
Line 369. Do you mean “highly vulnerable condition/situation”?
Line 374. Do you mean “were” not “was” when three items are referred to?
Line 385. Have you tried other values of mu from 0 to 1 to ensure no high-risk enterprises?
Line 396. Can you paraphrase this as “a heightened level of attention should be paid to …”
Finally, it is weird to enumerate your conclusion. Please write in paragraph form!
Last but not least, are you able to draw 2 to 3 policy recommendations based on your results?
Author Response
Thanks for your suggestions, we have modified our manuscript and made a point-by-point response to your comments. We hope the revised manuscript satisfies you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Overall observations
Cite references as indicated in the template.
Review punctuation and split large paragraphs into shorter ones.
Minor observations
Table 1. Rearrange the table to become easier readable; use for Paragraph, Line spacing, Single.
Rearrange all equations as in the template.
After an equation, “Where” is written with small “w” and non-indented (left aligned).
All variables must be italic. For example, Line 155 – “n”, “RI” and so on.
Mention figure 6 in the paragraph which precede the figure.
Author Response
Thanks for your suggestions, we have modified our manuscript and made a point-by-point response to your comments. We hope our revised manuscript satisfies you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Line 35. “enterprises”
Line 46. “qualitative and quantitative analysis”
Line 56. Do you mean “large” or “huge” in lieu of “great”?
Line 60. “which analysis may generate results that are insufficient or incorrect”.
Line 61. Please clarify what is “objectiveness and objectiveness”.
Line 63. Please rewrite due to ambiguity and repetitiveness.
Line 80. After “could”, do not use third-person singular form of the verb “present”.
Line 179. “Greatly” is more of a bit sentimental. Use “substantial” or “significant”.
Line 181. You must state which version of SPSS you use to enable replication of your results.
Line 244. “of the total number of enterprises”
Line 245. Were the most of what? Please clarify.
Line 302. Why having “pressure” two times in a row? Please fix it.
Line 375. It should be “negligence of outlets”…., “and thus”, …
Line 377. You found no high-risk enterprises, so what are the existing ones?
Line 378. “forcing mechanism” sounds Chinese. Do you mean “an active prevention and risk control mechanism embedded with environmental liability insurance and damage assessment”?
Line 379. “sudden pollution” sounds outward. I would say “unexpected release of pollutants”.
Line 380. “rehearsal activities” sound awkward. Just say “drills” to describe what you mean.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
We highly appreciate the valuable comments of your suggestions on our manuscript of “sustainability-1968680”. These suggestions are quite helpful for us and we incorporate them into the revised paper. During the last week, we polished the language and reconstructed the manuscript to improve its quality. The following are the point-to-point answers to your suggestions and confusion.
Reviewer 1
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Line 35. “enterprises”
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 46. “qualitative and quantitative analysis”
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 56. Do you mean “large” or “huge” in lieu of “great”?
Response: We have substituted it with ‘large’.
Line 60. “which analysis may generate results that are insufficient or incorrect”.
Response: We have substituted it with ‘which may generate the insufficient and even incorrected analysis results when AHP or EW is solely used’.
Line 61. Please clarify what is “objectiveness and objectiveness”.
Response: We have substituted it with ‘the objectiveness and the subjectiveness’.
Line 63. Please rewrite due to ambiguity and repetitiveness.
Response: We have rewritten it with ‘A combination method integrates the subjectivity of AHP and the objectivity of EW, and avoids some of the drawbacks derived from methods’ the nature of these methods separately’, and deleted the front sentence due to its redundant.
Line 80. After “could”, do not use third-person singular form of the verb “present”.
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 179. “Greatly” is more of a bit sentimental. Use “substantial” or “significant”.
Response: We have substituted it with ‘substantially’.
Line 181. You must state which version of SPSS you use to enable replication of your results.
Response: It refers to SPSS 23.0.
Line 244. “of the total number of enterprises”
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 245. Were the most of what? Please clarify.
Response: We have revised this sentence into ‘Additionally, the number of enterprises with medium level of risk were the most in Xigu District’.
Line 302. Why having “pressure” two times in a row? Please fix it.
Response: We have deleted the second ‘pressure’.
Line 375. It should be “negligence of outlets”…., “and thus”, …
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 377. You found no high-risk enterprises, so what are the existing ones?
Response: Sorry for our mistakes, our meaning is ‘potential high-risk and existing medium-risk enterprises’.
Line 378. “forcing mechanism” sounds Chinese. Do you mean “an active prevention and risk control mechanism embedded with environmental liability insurance and damage assessment”?
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have corrected it.
Line 379. “sudden pollution” sounds outward. I would say “unexpected release of pollutants”.
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have modified it.
Line 380. “rehearsal activities” sound awkward. Just say “drills” to describe what you mean.
Response: Thanks for your reminding, we have modified it.
