Impact of Major Function-Oriented Zone Planning on Spatial and Temporal Evolution of “Three Zone Space” in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

The paper systematically analyzed the changing characteristics of TZS on the national scale by reasonably determining TZS areas in China, and the work is important for land use planning and sustainable development in China. But there are some problems need to be imporved before the publication.

(1) In lines 27-29, the last sentence of the abstract is separated from the previous content, and the logic seems to be incomplete.

(2) The introduction should be improved with more international cases, and should clarify the novelty of the research.

(3) In line 85, there are different expression of the classification of the land use data, such as 2nd-level classes, second-level classes, secondary land use data. Please use a unified expression to accurate express the classification system of the land use.

(4) The sum of the proportion of “three zone space” is not 100% in line 143.

(5) Please unify the expression of 'the urban space area' and ' urban areas'? Are they the same meaning in the paper?

(6) In lines 183-184, the meaning of the sentence seems not clear without the in and out zone space types.

(7) The overall proportion of separators used in line-changing is large, which affects reading to a certain extent. (For example, the 216th line ' -0.21 %, ' negative sign and value are separated due to line change)

(8) what is EPLS on line 66? The unit of the area is wrong in line 177, and the square of km has to be superscript in the whole paper.

Please polish the language with the help of native speaker or language editing services.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 1: 1. In lines 27-29, the last sentence of the abstract is separated from the previous content, and the logic seems to be incomplete. Response: Thank you very much for raising this question. We have revised it to “The reasonable allocation and development of the "three zone space" is of great significance for protecting the natural and ecological environment”. 2.The introduction should be improved with more international cases, and should clarify the novelty of the research. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have made revisions in the introduction as required. The delineation of the "three zones and three lines" is a plan proposed by China at the national level for the use of national land space. Reasonable spatial control is to further enhance advantages, supplement weaknesses, and support high-quality development with high-quality land spatial layout. Its theoretical and practical significance can provide certain reference value to a certain extent. 3. In line 85, there are different expression of the classification of the land use data, such as 2nd-level classes, second-level classes, secondary land use data. Please use a unified expression to accurate express the classification system of the land use. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have made modifications to lines 85 and 110 based on your suggestion. 4.The sum of the proportion of “three zone space” is not 100% in line 143. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. The line 144 and table 2 have been revised. 5. Please unify the expression of 'the urban space area' and ' urban areas'? Are they the same meaning in the paper? Response: Thank you very much for raising this question. We have revised line 178 to address this issue. And conducted a detailed examination of similar issues throughout the entire manuscript. 6. In lines 183-184, the meaning of the sentence seems not clear without the in and out zone space types. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have made modifications to lines 183 to 184 based on your suggestion. 7. The overall proportion of separators used in line-changing is large, which affects reading to a certain extent. (For example, the 216th line ' -0.21 %, ' negative sign and value are separated due to line change). Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have revised all similar issues in the manuscript. 8. what is EPLS on line 66? The unit of the area is wrong in line 177, and the square of km has to be superscript in the whole paper. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have revised the EPLS on line 66 to TZS. We have reviewed and revised the superscribing of units throughout the entire manuscript. Finally, we have polished the language with the help of native speakers or language editing services.

Reviewer 2 Report

It is a very thorough, high-level study. It is a very thorough and convincing analysis of the changes in the land use in the period 2010-2020. However, two very important points are not made clear to the reader.

1/ What characterised land use trends before 2010? Why was it necessary to introduce the MFOZ (perhaps because of the uncontrolled intensive growth of urban land use? A reduction in areas with ecological functions?) It would be useful to present in a paragraph the trends in land use change that characterise the period before 2010.

2/ It is very important to point out that the study does not show to what extent the introduction of the MFOZ has had an impact on this process. For example, has the regulatory toolbox of the authorities changed? The title of the study suggests that the authors are describing the impact of the introduction of the MFOZ, but it is not clear to what extent the changes in the land use can be considered to be the result of the introduction of the MFOZ (to what extent it has altered the trends in the land use change observed in the past). The authors have sought to capture the change, to explore the spatial aspect of the change, and have done so to a very high standard. However, the title and content of the study are not consistent. I propose a rewording of the title of the study.

 

Other comments:

- Figures, cartograms are very informative

- Figure 2 - Table 2 are very close together, confusing the reader, more space is needed between the two graphical elements.

The language quality of the study is good, there are no confusing terms (wording), and the authors' train of thought is logical and easy to follow.

Author Response

Reviewer 2: 1. What characterised land use trends before 2010? Why was it necessary to introduce the MFOZ (perhaps because of the uncontrolled intensive growth of urban land use? A reduction in areas with ecological functions?) It would be useful to present in a paragraph the trends in land use change that characterise the period before 2010. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. Our research mainly focuses on the changes in the spatial pattern of the three zones space in China since the release of the national main functional plan in 2010. Describe whether the evolution of the three zones space is in line with national spatial planning, to optimize or improve future national spatial planning plans and governance levels. 2. It is very important to point out that the study does not show to what extent the introduction of the MFOZ has had an impact on this process. For example, has the regulatory toolbox of the authorities changed? The title of the study suggests that the authors are describing the impact of the introduction of the MFOZ, but it is not clear to what extent the changes in the land use can be considered to be the result of the introduction of the MFOZ (to what extent it has altered the trends in the land use change observed in the past). The authors have sought to capture the change, to explore the spatial aspect of the change, and have done so to a very high standard. However, the title and content of the study are not consistent. I propose a rewording of the title of the study. Response: Our research is about the impact of the main functional area on the spatial changes in the three zones. The analysis of changes from 2010 to 2020 is essentially the impact of the main functional area on the spatial changes in the three zones. 3. Figure 2 - Table 2 are very close together, confusing the reader, more space is needed between the two graphical elements. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have added blank rows between Figure 2 and Table 2.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments to the Article “Impact of Major Function-Oriented Zone Planning on spatial and temporal evolution of “Three Zone Space” in China” by Xinliang Xu et al

 

The authors in this paper focus on analyzing, based on high-resolution remote sensing land use data, the changing characteristics of the Three Zone Space (TZS) on the China’s national scale by determining TZS areas. The authors focused on analyzing possible changes on characteristics of the Three Zone Space in China, considering data in the period from 2010 to 2020.

 

The Introduction section is concise and properly presents the aim and the importance of the analysis, mentioning up to date references.

 

The Results section is informative and well structured, while the Discussion and Conclusion section summarizes the findings.

 

The analysis proposed is relevant is policy making regarding the changing trends in the occupation of agricultural spaces, ecological spaces, and urban spaces. The analysis is only exploratory, and no comparison is made with similar studies from other countries. The analysis is exploratory, no new methodology is proposed.

 

The conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and address the main question posed.

 

Figures are illustrative of the analysis conducted.

 

Just as a small revision suggestion, authors should change the format of the reference in line 46 and state the meaning of the acronym EPLS in line 66.

Author Response

Reviewer 3: 1.Just as a small revision suggestion, authors should change the format of the reference in line 46 and state the meaning of the acronym EPLS in line 66. Response: Thanks for your suggestion. We have revised the EPLS on line 66 to TZS. In response to this issue, we did not find any issues with the reference format in line 46, but we found errors in the reference format in line 88 and made revisions accordingly.