Sustainable Renewal Strategies for Older Communities from the Perspective of Living Experience

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting study related to the rehabilitation of old neighborhoods and tries to explore and analyze the real-life experience of the residents to propose sustainable rehabilitation strategies and try to validate if the results of the study can be replicated in other areas.

However, the following issues should be improved:

-The title could be shortened.
-The Summary and its development in the document must be written in a more structured way following the classic concepts of introduction, objective, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusions.

-I disagree with the statement that "there are not many research results that can provide a guide for community renewal in the current context". So, regarding the bibliographical references, they are very scarce, and there are references not mentioned that should be included.

-Line 59. It must be included correctly the cite of Wang Zhenpo with bibliography.

-Lines 64-65. In the paragraph of these lines, an assertion that is too forceful is made, since it is known that there is bibliography that does take into account the experience or the feelings of the neighbors. That it has not been found does not mean that it does not exist, at least in the experiences of other countries.

-Although the model followed by Kano is known and applicable, its drawbacks and limitations should be mentioned.

-Line 211 and following. Although the results of each renewal projects are interesting, they are mostly deductible without the need to apply the kano model, so it would be convenient to emphasize what is most striking because it is unexpected, although we believe that there is not much to highlight.

-Figure 9 could be improved and the quality of the texts of some of the others.

-Titles 5 and 6 are the same.

In short, for greater clarity, the text should be reordered following the classic structure of most investigations. It must also indicate what the limitations of such research are, and what is really the innovation that it introduces and whose results cannot be intuitively deduced by an experienced professional in the field, and must also carry out a deeper and more exhaustive study regarding the authors who have dealt with similar matters and how they have done so.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The main question addressed by the research is the the elavoration of Sustainable Renewal Strategies for Older Communities, which is a relevant topic in the field because it proposes a specific strategy-intended inventory. This is also the added value of the research. The methodology is good and the analysis is carried out correctly with an in-depth analysis of the results. Figures and tables are ok.

Nevertheless, the weaknesses of this paper are the lack of the literature review.

The literature review should follow the paper "Right to the city and community facility planning for elderly: The case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong". I especially recommend:

- a section on Renewal Strategies for Older Communities

and expand the knowledge at international level by creating brief subsections on:

- 

the distortions provoked by capitalist urban regeneration processes by taking into references some international examples of the way urban renewal and regeneration have taken places, resulting in the increase of urban sprawl:

- 2020. Alpha City: How London Was Captured by the Super-Rich. London: Verso

- 2019. Regenerating Bilbao: From productive industries to productive services. Territorio, 89, 145-154

- 2019. Capital City. Gentrification and the real estate state. London-New York: Verso

- 2017. The icon project: architecture, cities and capitalist globalization. New York: Oxford University Press

- 1962. Urban Renewal in European Countries. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 28 (4), 229-238 (1962)

- 2018. Handbook of gentrification studies. Cheltenham-Northampton: Edward Elgar

And take into consideration some of the proposals by the paper recently published in Sustainability https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/1/457

 

The Authors must write this section to frame the theme they are going to analyze.

I am looking forward to read an update version

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

In view of the revised version, although some aspects indicated in the first revision could still be added that would improve the work and it is understood that the document remains little novel in general, it could nevertheless be accepted for publication since it is considered that the basic level has been achieved.

Reviewer 2 Report

the paper's ready for publication