Research on the Evaluation and Spatial–Temporal Evolution of Safe and Resilient Cities Based on Catastrophe Theory—A Case Study of Ten Regions in Western China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper constructs an index system for evaluating urban resilience, and evaluates the characteristics of the temporal and spatial evolution of urban resilience based on case studies. It draws an interesting topic.The whole research has certain value and contribution. The manuscript is within the journal scope. For its improvement, a couple of suggestions are acknowledged:
1. In the Introduction section, the authors need to explain clearly what is the significance of this research? And what are the main contributions and research purposes of this paper?
2. The language of the manuscript must be improved. I recommend that the authors invite a native English speaker to edit the language.
3. The literature review is too weak.There already have many existing studies on methods of urban resilience. The authors need to sort out and summarize the existing methods of locating evacuation sites according to the methods of use and adaptation conditions. And explain the reasons for the methods chosen in this paper.It is recommended that the author add more international literatures to improve this part.
4. The authors selected different indicators to measure the attributes of urban resilience. What are the selection criteria? How do they characterize the difference between urban and rural spaces?
5. The authors should follow the currently accepted academic concept that, as far as I know, it should be "urban resilience" rather than "urban safety resilience".
6. The process of some calculations could be streamlined. The authors should pay more attention to the results and explore the reasons behind the spatial and temporal differences in urban resilience.
7.The results of the data analysis should be presented in the form of a spatial analysis map, so that the readers can easily understand.
8. The result section and discussion section are too simple and now look more like a display of calculation results without in-depth analysis and discussion.
9.The conclusion part needs to be further improved. In addition to the need to summarize and analyze the results of this study, it is necessary to make a certain outlook on the future research direction.
The paper addresses an important problem. However, the presentation must be improved.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewers for their professional comments on our article. Based on your suggestions, we have made numerous corrections to our previous manuscript and responded to your queries, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper focuses on urban security and the importance of resilient development in ensuring cities' safety in the face of uncertainties. It proposes an evaluation index system for urban safety resilience based on sustainable urban development principles. The paper utilizes catastrophe theory to establish an evaluation model and employs geographic information systems (GIS) and the Moran index for spatial-temporal analysis of urban security resilience in ten regions of western China. The findings indicate that most regions in western China have shown an increasing trend in urban safety resilience over time (2017, 2019, and 2021). Chongqing, Sichuan, and Shaanxi provinces exhibit relatively high levels of urban safety resilience compared to other regions in the western part of the country. However, regions like Ningxia and Gansu are susceptible to disasters, and their urban infrastructure is relatively underdeveloped. The paper suggests the need for flexible transformation in urban planning and governance to explore appropriate models of urban safety resilience, with sustainable development as the cornerstone.
Overall, this paper contributes valuable knowledge and insights to the field of urban security and resilience. Its rigorous methodology, comprehensive analysis, and practical recommendations make it a valuable resource for policymakers, urban planners, and researchers interested in enhancing urban safety in complex and uncertain environments.
There are some minor comments that need to be addressed:
1. The figures in the presentation need improvement as some are unclear and have low resolution.
2. Providing a managerial insight for policy makers can enhance the paper's equality.
3. Further elaboration is needed for certain concepts in the research methodology, and clear presentation of formulas, particularly in terms of their notations.
-
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewers for their professional comments on our article. Based on your suggestions, we have made numerous corrections to our previous manuscript and responded to your queries, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have made certain improvements to the article. For its improvement, a couple of suggestions are acknowledged:
1.The language of the manuscript still need be improved. I recommend that the authors invite a native English speaker to edit the language.
2.The authors selected different indicators to measure the attributes of urban resilience. What are the selection criteria?The authors should be based on the analysis of the urban security resilience mechanism, and then propose a corresponding evaluation index system.
The language of the manuscript still need be improved. I recommend that the authors invite a native English speaker to edit the language.
Author Response
Thank you for reviewing our manuscript again. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
