Study on the Spatial and Temporal Evolution Characteristics and Driving Factors of the “Production–Living–Ecological Space” in Changfeng County
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Study on the spatial and temporal evolution characteristics and driving factors of the "Production-Living-Ecological space" in Changfeng County
Abstract
Line 11 -13: Why is this part numbered? Authors should clarify the aim of this paper. It is not clear
Line 17 -24: Much as we appreciate that results have been provided, however, I take note that this is not clear. The results should be segmented as per the objectives of the study and not generic. Finally, the implications of this study also be provided in this section of the paper.
Introduction
Line 33-34 – this sentence is long and needs to be revised
Line 53-56 – provide examples of implications other than leaving this statement hanging
Line 60 -63 – provide a reference for this assertation
Generally, authors need to improve this section by providing more details on this typical study case for the consequences of developments, but also, they demonstrate ongoing interventions conducted by the county
2.1. Overview of the study area
Figure 1: the location map resolution/scale should be improved; it is very small.
Line 90-100– citations are missing on the provided text
Line 111-116 – consider revising this sentence. Secondly, demonstrate how land use data for 2000, 2010 and 2020 was pre -processed
2.3. Research Methods – this sub title is inappropriate. A better one should be provided cover the analysis being conducted
2.3.5 Land Use Drivers – its not clear how these results were arrived at and this needs to be made clear. What was the basis for classifying between socio-economic and environmental drivers
Results
Table 3, authors need to include result measurement units for the figures
Figure 4 the maps are not clear and especially the legend. The items need to be made readable
3.2.1. Shifting the focus of "production-living-ecological space" - the analysis and sentence structure under this sub title should be revised
5. Conclusions and Discussion – authors should refer to the guidelines of this journal
This part of the paper is adequate and should be revised. They should be separated. Authors need to infer their findings to existing body of literature, but for now its inadequate
The sentences are too long and majority need to be paraphrased
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Based on the Barycenter Migration Model, land use transfer matrix, and land use dynamic attitude, this paper describes the spatio-temporal evolution features of land use in Changfeng County, explains the three dominant functions of production-living-ecological space (PLES) and comprehensively analyzes the natural, socio-economic and policy-related drivers of change in PLES, which has certain reference value for the optimal allocation of land resources in other similar counties. However, at present, the following problems still exist in the abstract, literature review, interpretation of results and other aspects of the paper, which are suggested to be revised:
Comment 1: In the abstract part, it lacks research significance and quantitative description of the results, and the innovation of the article is not highlighted. The core conclusions and research themes of the article are not reflected. It is suggested that the author refine and modify the abstract of the paper.
Comment 2: In the introduction, the description of the practical problem is relatively broad, the topic is not focused enough, and there is a lack of collation and review of the central topic of the article, "drivers of change in PLES", such as what results have been achieved in the current research, what problems exist in the research and the possible direction of follow-up research. The practical problems targeted by the research are not clear, so it is recommended to supplement the necessity and scientific nature of this research.
Comment 3: The literature review in the introduction is not and does not indicate the innovative and marginal contribution of this article. The current research is not in-depth enough and specific enough to elaborate on the main findings and existing gaps of the research work, and this statement is not organized. It is suggested to carry out literature review by referring to the logic of high-level papers, pay attention to the cohesion of the structure and the refinement of language expression. In addition, based on keywords such as "Production-Living-Ecological space", "spatial and temporal evolution" and "driving factors", the author is suggested to cite the following literature:
[1] Multidimensional measurement of poverty and its spatio-temporal dynamics in China from the perspective of development geography[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences,2021,31(1).
[2] Investigation on spatial and temporal variation of coupling coordination between socioeconomic and ecological environment: A case study of the Loess Plateau, China[J]. Ecological Indicators,2022,136.
Comment 4: In the method part, the methods are not outlined in sufficient detail, which does not explain the method and index selection basis for the study of land use drivers. The construction basis and applicable conditions of different methods have not been completely analyzed. Pay attention to the standardization and refinement of language expression.
Comment 5: In the results part, the author only gives a general description of the results, and lacks a summary of the deep causes and basic laws behind the results. The analysis of driving factors section lacks the overall logic. Most of the results and discussions seems to be more descriptive than scientific. It is recommended that the authors add some reasoning and comparisons.
Comment 6: The conclusions and discussion part of the article should not only be a repetition of the previous results. It should highlights the applicability of the results for further work. It is recommended to further sublimate this part, focus on the analysis of the contribution and deficiency of the paper, and appropriately put forward targeted suggestions and future research direction.
Comment 7: The overall writing logic of the article needs to be strengthened, and the language expression needs to be further condensed and improved In addition, pay attention to details, such as expression specifications, neat formatting and picture beautification.
none
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The legend of Figure 1 should be translated in full.
The article has a strong analytical and descriptive character. The methodology is relatively simple and robust, adapted to the object of study and the proposed objectives. Overall, the text is a kind of testimony to the methodological and conceptual maturity that the research of territorial dynamics in the Chinese space has reached.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
In the article study, Production-Living-Ecological space changes in Changfeng County were examined. The study has been comprehensively covered. Some suggestions about the article are as follows:
Figure 1. Location map of the study area. It is not clear which country's administrative border the study area is located in. Also, visibility is not clear when the map is too small. There are also some non-English expressions in the legend.
In 2.3.2 Land use transfer matrix section S21 repeated in the matrix of the equation 2 . It should have been S22. The expression in the second column of the second row should have been S22.
Figure 2. "Production-living-ecological space" single dynamic attitude change. The figure is not intelligible, but can be distinguished if it is colored.
It would be better to give the other graphics in the article in color to be more understandable.
Production-Living-Ecological space (PLES) abbreviation is not used in the article. Since an abbreviation as PLES has been made, it should be used throughout the article.
What does EPLS mean in "4. Analysis of driving factors"?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
NONE
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
