Cultural Space as Sustainability Indicator for Development Planning (Case Study in Jakarta Coastal Area)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Thank you for your appropriate response.
Language comments are corrected in a proper way. Thank you.
Author Response
Further language edits done, thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)
Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting to the Sustainability Journal. Your idea is exciting but there are major issues that you need to address:
1. Your article is very long and the readers are not able to follow all details;
2. You are not interested in contributing to scholarship and your manuscript has not good literature review that is important. Still, you are added as the main argument the part of empirical research.
3. Starting from the introduction you need to make your manuscript reduction like in the introduction line 29-41; 59-71.
4. Section 2.1 must be reduced.
5. Then you need to add the normal part about the literature review. In your theory you need to give answers on how scholars define cultural space; sustainability indicators and etc. You can be enlightened with the following source: Burksiene, V., Dvorak, J., & Burbulyte-Tsiskarishvili, G. (2018). Sustainability and sustainability marketing in competing for the title of European Capital of Culture. Organizacija, 51(1), 66-78.
6. In the introduction you need to explain which research problem you are addressing and which gap your research close.
7. You need to have a normal conclusion and add some limitations.
8. You have a very small amount of respondents. Only 10. You need to explain how many respondents you have initially planned.
9. All in all try to focus on the main things in your provided results and add the theoretical part that will ground your results.
10. Unclear blue links in the text
All the best
Author Response
Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting to the Sustainability Journal. Your idea is exciting but there are major issues that you need to address:
Point 1
- Your article is very long and the readers are not able to follow all details;
Response 1: Article sections and content has been restructured into 21 pages in total.
Point 2
- You are not interested in contributing to scholarship and your manuscript has not good literature review that is important. Still, you are added as the main argument the part of empirical research.
Response 2: Introduction section has been restructured to elaborate literature review, in order, 1. Development policy context, 2. The role of indicators especially in policy agenda setting and evaluation, 3. Cultural sustainability indicators, 4. Culture as defined and placed in Indonesian policy context, and 5. The gap in current field and research aims to close it. Discussion section also elaborated to link methodologies from different cultural areas to obtain the local aim.
Point 3
- Starting from the introduction you need to make your manuscript reduction like in the introduction line 29-41; 59-71.
Response 3: Removed such general paragraphs from the Introduction section.
Point 4
- Section 2.1 must be reduced.
Response 4: Less relevant narration in the Study area sub-section (lines 162-232) has been modified. and reformatted the Results section. Final text at 20 pages.
Point 5
- Then you need to add the normal part about the literature review. In your theory you need to give answers on how scholars define cultural space; sustainability indicators and etc. You can be enlightened with the following source: Burksiene, V., Dvorak, J., & Burbulyte-Tsiskarishvili, G. (2018). Sustainability and sustainability marketing in competing for the title of European Capital of Culture. Organizacija, 51(1), 66-78.
Response 5: Thank you for the reference. Added to lines 335-337, reference number 35.
Point 6
- In the introduction you need to explain which research problem you are addressing and which gap your research close.
Response 6: The problem/gap statement and research aims are elaborated in lines 153-159.
Point 7
- You need to have a normal conclusion and add some limitations.
Response 7: The conclusion section has been added with the limitations of the study and future research needs in lines 737-754.
Point 8
- You have a very small amount of respondents. Only 10. You need to explain how many respondents you have initially planned.
Response 8: Elaborated the justification of sample size in lines 259-272.
Point 9
- All in all try to focus on the main things in your provided results and add the theoretical part that will ground your results.
Response 9: Thank you for the constructive input. Added a historical review of cultural policy in lines 111-131 to provide context of policy analysis in Discussion section. Results section also restructured to be in line with themes of analysis. Added a Conclusion section with synthesis of findings.
Point 10
- Unclear blue links in the text
Response 10: Links removed, thank you.
All the best
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
This is an interesting study examining the cultural aspect of space as a workable indicator for sustainability in development planning. The spaces were described in 3 categories: 1) core cultural spaces, 2)tactical cultural spaces, 3)spaces of cultural conflicts which should be considerer in the spatial planning as a cultural value of the analised space.
The additional value of the work is that it proofed that the methodologies from different cultural areas (fe. Jane Jacobs, USA) could be used to obtain the local aim.
However, there are some issues:
-explanation of the RW abbraviation (line 198 and next)
-it is worth of presentation that 10 informats group was verified through triangulation from how big group of citizens, number od stakeholders at the Subdistrict Office?
-needed Figures 5 and 6 correction:
Fig. 5. Map of tactical culture spaces in Kalibaru Subdistrict: there was used the same colour for "Karagan..." and "Throughout ..." positions, and on the map is presented only one line. What does mean the sepia/orange colour line which started near to 015 and 003, because it is not explained in the legend?
Fig. 6. Map of cultural spaces of conflict in Kalibaru Subdistrict: there is lack on the map of objects presented in the legend: pink colour- Fish auction, light green- Stockpilling materials and waste.
-3. Results (480-560) and 5. Conclusion (701-704, 725 and next): "Cultural transformation" part is presented in summarising written form. When planning spatial development, an additional form of a map would be useful, specifying the location of "culture as both a public good and commidity" in the area indicated as result of analysis and summary.
Author Response
This is an interesting study examining the cultural aspect of space as a workable indicator for sustainability in development planning. The spaces were described in 3 categories: 1) core cultural spaces, 2) tactical cultural spaces, 3) spaces of cultural conflicts which should be considerer in the spatial planning as a cultural value of the analised space.
The additional value of the work is that it proofed that the methodologies from different cultural areas (fe. Jane Jacobs, USA) could be used to obtain the local aim.
However, there are some issues:
Point 1
-explanation of the RW abbraviation (line 198 and next)
Response 1
-Elaborated in Line 207-208 as “Rukun Warga, a national categorization for hamlets”, thank you.
Point 2
-it is worth of presentation that 10 informats group was verified through triangulation from how big group of citizens, number od stakeholders at the Subdistrict Office?
Response 2
- Added in Lines 267-270 that the stakeholders include the Head of the Subdistrict Office and the Heads of the 14 RWs (hamlets).
Point 3
-needed Figures 5 and 6 correction:
Fig. 5. Map of tactical culture spaces in Kalibaru Subdistrict: there was used the same colour for "Karagan..." and "Throughout ..." positions, and on the map is presented only one line. What does mean the sepia/orange colour line which started near to 015 and 003, because it is not explained in the legend?
Fig. 6. Map of cultural spaces of conflict in Kalibaru Subdistrict: there is lack on the map of objects presented in the legend: pink colour- Fish auction, light green- Stockpilling materials and waste.
Response 3
- The figures have been revised, thank you for the corrections.
Point 4
-3. Results (480-560) and 5. Conclusion (701-704, 725 and next): "Cultural transformation" part is presented in summarising written form. When planning spatial development, an additional form of a map would be useful, specifying the location of "culture as both a public good and commidity" in the area indicated as result of analysis and summary.
Response 4
“Culture as both a public good and commodity” refers to a recommendation for policy included in Lines 122-130, Lines 138-150, and Lines 705-720, specifically that the existing seven indicator dimensions for culture - cultural economy, education, socio-cultural resilience, cultural heritage, cultural expression, literacy, and gender – so far collects data mostly on culture as a commodity (percentage of art workers, number of audiences, number of traditional product consumers, etc.). Culture as a public good may be generally emphasized through the recommendation to include Cultural Space as a new workable indicator dimension. Mapping the location for particular distinction between culture as commodity or public good was not done.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)
The authors of the article have been working with the concept of cultural sustainability from the beginning. In research focused on sustainability, we are more used to emphasizing the usual three pillars, environmental, economic, social. Environmental is often emphasized the most, with a disproportionate focus on energy efficiency.
Culture is a fundamental parameter for the survival of human civilization. Even research aimed at adaptation and mitigation in relation to climate change can be framed through a cultural filter. Nature must be preserved in the name of culture. Respect for nature lies in a culturally shaped worldview. Respect for the philosophy of sustainability in its three basic pillars is given by the cultural status of the society. So the authors set up the research very correctly.
It is practically impossible for the reviewer to assess detailed local ties and relationships with local names of locations and organizations. The research methodology and its objectives can be assessed. It would be appropriate to use the term case study in the title to emphasize the strongly local character of the research. In the discussion, it is then possible to consider the degree of generalization of the methodology and results.
The presented results can be useful for decision-making at the municipal level and also for similarly focused research in other geographical and cultural areas.The results of the presented local research form a pebble in the mosaic of global research on the sustainability of urban fragments with the potential of spillover to complex urban fragments.
One methodological aspect remains open. Isn't it more about mental maps in our case?, please explain, or at least draw attention to the connection between cognitive-mental mapping.
In order not to extend the range of primary sources from Edward Tolan to Kevin Lynch, it is possible to find a general in formation here:
Cognitive map - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_map https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_map
A few small notes in the continuity of the text:
Line 76... very progressive approach
CDI, the mentioned eight dimension line 146, could the authors offer a more detailed explanation?
Line 255 and further... the above mentioned explanation on cognitive-mental mapping is needed
Line 400..., figure 5. map of tactical culture spaces is showing photos of cultural conflict(?)
Line 561, Discussion – is showing the very real potential of the presented research - OK
Line 750... References- it would be nice to mention the work of Kevin Lynch
Author Response
The authors of the article have been working with the concept of cultural sustainability from the beginning. In research focused on sustainability, we are more used to emphasizing the usual three pillars, environmental, economic, social. Environmental is often emphasized the most, with a disproportionate focus on energy efficiency.
Culture is a fundamental parameter for the survival of human civilization. Even research aimed at adaptation and mitigation in relation to climate change can be framed through a cultural filter. Nature must be preserved in the name of culture. Respect for nature lies in a culturally shaped worldview. Respect for the philosophy of sustainability in its three basic pillars is given by the cultural status of the society. So the authors set up the research very correctly.
It is practically impossible for the reviewer to assess detailed local ties and relationships with local names of locations and organizations. The research methodology and its objectives can be assessed.
Point 1
It would be appropriate to use the term case study in the title to emphasize the strongly local character of the research. In the discussion, it is then possible to consider the degree of generalization of the methodology and results.
Response 1
Title changed accordingly: “Cultural Space as Sustainability Indicator for Development Planning (Case Study in Jakarta Coastal Area)”, thank you.
The presented results can be useful for decision-making at the municipal level and also for similarly focused research in other geographical and cultural areas. The results of the presented local research form a pebble in the mosaic of global research on the sustainability of urban fragments with the potential of spillover to complex urban fragments.
Point 2
One methodological aspect remains open. Isn't it more about mental maps in our case?, please explain, or at least draw attention to the connection between cognitive-mental mapping.
In order not to extend the range of primary sources from Edward Tolan to Kevin Lynch, it is possible to find a general information here:
Cognitive map - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_map https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_map
Response 2
Thank you for the term distinction. “Cognitive map” has been changed to “mental map” throughout the article. The work of Kevin Lynch has also been cited to connect the application of mental maps to urban planning and development.
A few small notes in the continuity of the text:
Point 3
Line 76... very progressive approach
CDI, the mentioned eight dimension line 146, could the authors offer a more detailed explanation?
Response 3
Elaborated in Lines 138-151. Policy implications are discussed in Lines 675-680.
Point 4
Line 255 and further... the above mentioned explanation on cognitive-mental mapping is needed
Response 4
Elaborated in Lines 243-250.
Point 5
Line 400..., figure 5. map of tactical culture spaces is showing photos of cultural conflict(?)
Response 5
The figure has been corrected, thank you.
Point 6
Line 561, Discussion – is showing the very real potential of the presented research - OK
Line 750... References- it would be nice to mention the work of Kevin Lynch
Response 6
Referenced Kevin Lynch’s The Image of the City in [31].
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)
Dear Authors,
I think that your manuscript can be accepted to the Sustainability journal.
Kind regards
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
- Minor Language editing is needed. (... indicators on cultural sustainability...) for example (Abstract section line #11)
- Looking at the economic pillar individually couldn't be considered as the root for applying the sustainability understanding (Introduction section). Actually, the deficiency presented in this mono-vision was the trigger for a more comprehensive approach (sustainable development approach).
- More organization is needed to make the argument clearer (Introduction Section, for example)
- For more elaboration, the study area has to be shown on maps in earlier parts of the investigation.
- The introduction section about the study area has to be made shorter.
- The size of the sample used for the case study is too small and the results accordingly are not reliable.
- The paper contains too much data and general information about the study area; however, more in-depth analytical investigations are needed.
- Minor Language editing is needed.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article has been very clearly structured, starting with a review of the literature, which touches on all the threads covered in the cross-sectional title. The purpose of the article has been precisely defined, and a research gap has been indicated with reference to the scientific literature and reports showing the importance of the analyzed issues for practice. Research methods have also been well described, especially the Spatial Cognitive Mapping method. The results are presented in detail but in an orderly manner. It would be useful to discuss them in a synthetic way in addition to detailed lists of observations. The discussion is valuable and builds on the previous review well. However, there is no separate conclusion, although there are indications for further research.
The need for proofreading, single stylistic errors, e.g.
Each story is a story about the spatial practices of the occupants and users of space.
Reviewer 3 Report
This is a very thorough and detailed study on cultural space as sustainability indicator for development planning in Jakarata Coastal Area, with fruitful findings, clear diagrams and constructive planning advices. Still, the manuscript at this stage needs some modification for publication. I have some comments for the authors to improve the article:
1. Regarding the writing of Results:
i. The seven sub-aspects in this part makes the reading tiring, as well as the article’s structure not clearly enough. I suggest including 3.1-3.3 under a subtitle such as "Regional Information", 3.4-3.7 under a subtitle such as "Cultural Spaces" to make the article more structured.
ii. The description of specific locations of the spaces in Table 5,6,7 is vague. I suggest that a small map of each location can be paired at the bottom of the table to make it easier for the readers to understand.
iii. In section 3.4, Figure 6,7,8,9 make it more difficult to locate the location of the photograph when reading it, so I recommend that the photograph can be accompanied by a map for illustration. Same issue can be found in section 3.5 and 3.6.
2. Regarding the writing of Discussion:
i. I think the article is missing a concluding section which can summaries the finding in part three.
ii. In “Introduction”, the authors write: “This study aims to establish cultural space as a possible eighth dimension of the IPK to further align cultural sustainability with the development and spatial planning sectors. ” However, in the discussion part, I think the authors should make a specific summary of the establishment of cultural space as the eighth dimension, and now it seems that the study’s arguments regarding the findings are not strong enough.
The Quality of English Language is good.
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting to the Sustainability Journal. Your idea is exciting but there are major issues that you need to address:
1. Your article is very long and the readers are not able to follow all details;
2. You are not interested in contributing to scholarship and your manuscript has not good literature review that is important. Still, you are added as the main argument the part of empirical research.
3. Starting from the introduction you need to make your manuscript reduction like in the introduction line 29-41; 59-71.
4. Section 2.1 must be reduced.
5. You must reduce your empirical part and focus on the main things. You final text must be somewhere 25 pages.
6. Then you need to add the normal part about the literature review. In your theory you need to give answers on how scholars define cultural space; sustainability indicators and etc. You can be enlightened with the following source: Burksiene, V., Dvorak, J., & Burbulyte-Tsiskarishvili, G. (2018). Sustainability and sustainability marketing in competing for the title of European Capital of Culture. Organizacija, 51(1), 66-78.
7. In the introduction you need to explain which research problem you are addressing and which gap your research close.
8. You need to have a normal conclusion and add some limitations.
9. You have a very small amount of respondents. Only 10. You need to explain how many respondents you have initially planned.
10. In conclusion you must thing about policy implications.
11. All in all try to focus on the main things in your provided results and add the theoretical part that will ground your results.
All the best
