Residential Space Organization of the Inner Mongolia Earth Dwellings around the Yellow River Basin

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)

This paper examines the spatial typology and manufacturing process of Mongolian yurts. The authors emphasise the function of these tent-like structures, which traditionally enable mobility for nomadic lifestyles. Using CAD and spreadsheets, they measure yurts' space syntax, including size and utilisation. The authors suggest that Inner Mongolian yurts adapt to the local environment and modern lifestyle while retaining traditional spatial notions.

Comments:

Please provide comprehensive explanations or evidential examples for each category - like how spatial configurations reflect societal norms or hierarchies) would have strengthened this argument.

If the authors had provided examples of the adaptability of yurts to the local environment and modern lifestyle while retaining traditional spatial concepts, their argument would have been even more convincing. These modifications may pertain to the materials used to construct yurts or to changes in the interior spatial layout to facilitate a modern way of life.

Please elaborate on how traditional spatial concepts have been maintained despite these changes. 

English is okay.

Author Response

Responds to Reviewer

Thank you very much for your time reviewing the manuscript. We appreciate your feedback. We provided explanations based on the comments and suggestions, hoping to address your concerns.

 

For the comment “Provide examples or explanations to each category”

In the preliminary stage of our research, we classified the collected samples in two ways: according to typological methods based on plan structures and basic functional spaces. In Table 2a and 2b, we provided corresponding plan samples for each type and simplified diagrams explaining the types.

After conducting our calculations and analysis, we found that only the basic functional space significantly impacted the organization of the plan structures (4.1). As a result, our subsequent research focused on categorizing and describing plan forms based on their basic functional spaces. Through comparative calculations, we discovered that plan forms of different basic functional space types exhibited more similarities in spatial organization (4.3, 4.4). The results of the H* calculation also indicated genetic similarities among the different forms (Table 3). Following the discussion of the differences between various types of basic functional spaces, our paper emphasized statements regarding the commonalities in spatial organization (lines 485-493, 526-541). Therefore, we did not provide further examples categorized by type.

 

For the comment “Provide examples to explain how the traditional living space is retained while adapting to the local environment and modern lifestyle”

Our research focuses on contemporary rural dwellings and analyzes how modern lifestyles are organized within traditional living spaces. When narrating the evolution of local dwelling plans, we compared the plan of the Mongolian yurt (ger), the predominant dwelling style from 400 B.C. to the 1650s, with the plans of contemporary rural dwellings from earlier and later periods (Table 1). After the 1650s, based on the plan characteristics of local rural dwellings and the Mongolian yurt, a basic spatial form composed of a Kang-stove emerged within the plans (lines 96-99). The results of our research indicate that traditional basic spatial forms have been retained. Still, they have evolved into different expressions based on usage patterns and changes in modern lifestyle items. We categorized these spaces into α, β, and γ types. Plans that could not be categorized into these three types were designated as * (lines 207-222). Subsequently, our study focused on four categories of basic spatial forms. After analyzing the characteristics of different types of spatial organizations, we further analyzed the characteristics of different functional space organizations. Since the analysis was oriented toward group behavior, this research did not provide individual case citations for illustration.

 

For the comment “These modifications may pertain to the materials used to construct yurts or to changes in the interior spatial layout to facilitate a modern way of life”

In our research, we considered the influence of terrain and construction methods when selecting samples for analysis, as these factors might affect the organization of living spaces. During the classification of samples, we found that terrain had a certain impact on the division of spatial structures. After calculating structural and functional space classifications, we determined that the basic functional space was related to spatial organization, while the structural form was not (4.1). Considering the background factors of the samples, we concluded that neither terrain nor architectural style influenced spatial organization.

 

For the comment “Elaborate on how traditional spatial concepts have been maintained despite these changes”

Based on the comments, after calculating the parameters of functional space, we point out that contemporary living within traditional rural dwellings still revolves around the basic functional space and the stove used for heating (lines 485-489). Depending on the newly formed functional spaces exhibited diverse organizational patterns, we have added information regarding the characteristics of new spaces formed due to the use of household appliances in the plan organization in lines 417-426.

 

Sincerely

The authors

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Dear Authors,

In my opinion, the paper is well-established and the subject is interesting and practical and, it is acceptable for publication. But, according to your request, I prepared some comments as below:

The goal of the study is to investigate the modern spatial organization 16 within the traditional earth dwellings in the Inner 15 Mongolia region of the Yellow River basin. Prior research frequently did not examine if the cultural and environmental surroundings of a larger region had a comparable influence on the spatial features of dwellings and this is the innovation of the research.

The paper is structurally good and any weakness is not detected.

Figures and Tables should be double-checked because there is a lot of text overring the zone especially in Table 4 and Table A2. Also, the quality of some of figures should be improved Figs.1-7.

 

Best regards,

Author Response

Responds to Reviewer

Thank you very much for your time reviewing the manuscript. We appreciate your feedback. We have addressed the issue of disorganized figure and table formats and made corrections to the inaccurately labeled figure and table titles. We hope the work fully addresses your concerns.

 

Sincerely

The authors

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

The paper "Residential Space Organization of the Inner Mongolia Earth Dwellings Around the Yellow River Basin" deals with traditional earthen dwellings in the Yellow River Basin part of Inner Mongolia, emphasizing the adoption of contemporary spatial organizations within these local residences. In the paper, 52 dwellings were processed, whose plans were methodologically analyzed, and conclusions were drawn about their surface and functional space type characteristics. The paper offers an interesting and relevant topic, and the results could be useful. The subject of the work fits into the selected special issue of the magazine.

Before publishing the work, it should undergo some revisions.

The main comments are below:

 

Abstract

The summary should be reworked. It should concisely summarise the entire work with the most important results. The summary should mainly contain principal objectives, methods used, principal results and main conclusions.

 

1. Introduction

The Table 1 caption goes above the Table. The Table is messy; the text is over the pictures.

Please insert figures and tables after they are mentioned in the text. It's confusing like this.

References are not properly ordered; for example, in line 65, there is a reference [32], which came after reference [10]. This happened in a couple of places in the work; please check and correct everything.

The Introduction is long. It should be shortened so that the reader can focus on the most important aspects of this paper. Emphasis should be placed on the novelty of this work. Most of the Introduction can be shifted to a literature review.

At the end of the Introduction, announce the other parts of the paper in one paragraph.

 

2. Literature review

This section is too short. As already mentioned, transfer parts of the Introduction to the Literature review and add additional references as needed.

 

3. Material and Method

How did you get the numbers 7, 6 and 39? (lines 168-169)

What was the data collection process like? Describe in more detail!

Title 3.2.? (line 175)

Insert the Table with the main statistical characteristics of the sample and comment!

In line 189, Table 2a is mentioned, and what it contains, but on the next page, where the tables are shown, it is evident that Table 2b corresponds to the description in line 189.

This part is messy; the table name is in the middle of the text (lines 196-202).

After Table 2a, not all symbols that appear in it are explained.

Title 3.2.3.? (lines 213-214)

Figure A1, which does not exist, is mentioned (lines 229, 243)

Content under 3.3.2. needs to be improved, especially the literature and the methodological part, to explain why it was decided to use the mentioned parameters, what they mean and what they include.

The formulas in lines 284-288 should be referred to in the text.

 

4. Data analysis

...It analyzes... What analyzes? (line 321)

The Table on page 10 has no name, nor is it referred to in the text.

Figure 5 has some text over it.

Figure A2? (line 440)

 

5. Discussion

Look back at the research questions from the Introduction (lines 115-118). Comment!

Comment additionally on the last sentence (lines 487-489). Where is the potential for sustainable development, and how can it be realized?

 

6. Conclusion

Expand the part from 523-528.

 

7. Literature

The literature is appropriate, but some basic and international-level references should be added, especially in the literature review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

GENERAL COMMENT: The work is difficult to follow; it needs to be more organized, precise, and clearer. 

Author Response

Responds to Reviewer

First, we apologize for the formatting issues during the file upload, which resulted in difficulty reading the content. We also appreciate your patience and detailed feedback, which helped us revise the manuscript. We hope the explanation fully addresses your concerns.

 

1. Respond to comments on format issues

1）We have corrected the issues on tables and figures. Table 1 and Table 10's titles have been arranged on the top of the corresponding table. The order of a and b of Table 2 was readjusted.

2) The text on Figure 5 has moved away. Figure A1 and Figure A2 are misreferences and replaced by Table A1 and Table A2.

3) The references' orders are readjusted. The parts that reference the same literature, like in line 144 and line 305, are adding pages after the reference number to distinguish.

4) The 3.2 (line 186) and 3.2.3 (line 223) are rewritten

 

2. Respond to comments on the abstract

In the abstract, we added the research objectives, the methods used in the study, the results obtained from the analysis, and the value the research can provide in lines 15-27.

 

3. Respond to comments on the introduction

1) In the introduction, we added the social context that inspired the research and the existing conceptual understanding in the research field to the first paragraph (lines 34-45). Move specific existing research content to the first paragraph of the literature review. At the end of the second paragraph of the introduction, based on the current regional issues, introduce the problems that the research will focus on. Add a description of the research emphasis at the end of the introduction section.

2) We restructured the introduction, integrated the description of the research background into the second paragraph, and combined the research content part in the subsequent sections into the third paragraph.

 

4. Respond to comments on the literature review

Because research on Inner Mongolian dwellings is primarily led by Chinese scholars, with fewer notifications from other countries, the review of research content in the field of dwellings primarily focuses on the work of Chinese scholars. In the research methods section, we have included references to the work of international scholars [26-33] and briefly discussed the recent applications of syntax in spatial studies.

 

5. Respond to comments on material and method

1) In lines 171-185, we discuss the sample selection process. Initially, based on previous research, we understood that traditional earthen dwellings exhibit different styles due to variations in construction location and techniques. To enhance sample diversity, we aimed to select dwellings located in different terrains and possessing different styles. However, policies promoting demolition and centralized living have produced scarce available dwelling samples in mountainous and hilly regions in recent years. After extensive field visits, we only identified two predominant styles among the dwelling styles, Yao and House, with only a limited number of Yao-style dwellings suitable for analysis. For this purpose, we selected seven samples from mountainous areas, six samples from hilly areas, and thirty-nine samples from plain regions, totaling fifty-two Two Yao-style residences are among these samples, while the rest are house-style.

2) We depicted the content of Table 2a in lines 199-206.

3) We have rewritten 3.3.2 to explain the meanings of relevant parameters and how these meanings illustrate phenomena in spatial analysis. The reason for choosing these parameters is in the last paragraph of the Chapter Parameters.

4) We marked the parts in the manuscript that reference the formula as comments.

 

6. Respond to comments on data analysis

To avoid confusion, we have rephrased the opening sentence of section 4.1 (lines 343-344) as the comment.

 

7. Respond to comments on discussion

1） Based on the suggestions, we have restructured the second paragraph of the discussion. In lines 479-484, we addressed the first question raised in the introduction: "Do earth dwellings in the Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River basin exhibit similar spatial organizational patterns?" In lines 486-494, we outlined the specific characteristics manifested in the spatial organization of dwellings resulting from the study, answering the second question posed in the introduction: "What distinctive characteristics are manifested in these spatial organizational patterns?"

2）At the end of the discussion, in lines 502-508, we elucidate the significance of the research findings. The spatial organizational characteristics of earthen dwellings in the Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River basin are not influenced by terrain or style. This result makes the resident culture adaptable for integration into local construction practices that use different building materials and are constructed in various environmental conditions. This flexibility demonstrates that regional dwelling cultures are not restricted by specific external conditions, thereby offering the potential for their sustainable development.

 

8. Respond to comments on conclusion

In the penultimate paragraph of the conclusion, we have incorporated a summary of the significance of the research and its potential value as a reference for the future development of dwellings.

Sincerely

The authors

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

Dear authors, thank you for adequately responding to my remarks.

I have no comments on the content.

I only ask that You go through the MS once more and correct possible editing errors.

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

The article’s content is valuable, but in its current state, it is far from being published as a scientific article.

 

1- The beginning and end of the abstract need to be completed to explain the research problem/gap and its contribution.

 

2- The introduction, to clearly explain the problem/gap and, at the same time, the contribution of the research, should start from the fundamental topics concerning related studies and not directly from the case (Inner Mongolia Earth Dwellings.) In addition, the introduction’s last paragraph should explain the paper’s structure to the reader.

 

3- The article’s structure in terms of conventional sections, including literature review (theoretical framework/conceptual model), study area, research methodology (materials and methods), results, discussion, and conclusion, must be rearranged and rewritten.

 

4- The paper must pursue its empirical part based on a theoretical foundation focusing on spatial organization.

 

5- The styles of citations are not uniform and need to be revised.

 

6- It is suggested to use the content of the following recent related studies, including one from Sustainability, in the theoretical, methodological, and interpretive sections of the article:

 

Chen, Y., Xu, K., Liu, P., Jiang, R., Qiu, J., Ding, K., & Fukuda, H. (2021). Space as sociocultural construct: Reinterpreting the traditional residences in jinqu basin, china from the perspective of space syntax. Sustainability, 13(16), 9004.

 

Xu, K., Chai, X., Jiang, R., & Chen, Y. (2023). Quantitative Comparison of Space Syntax in Regional Characteristics of Rural Architecture: A Study of Traditional Rural Houses in Jinhua and Quzhou, China. Buildings, 13(6), 1507.

-

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for considering the Journal of Sustainability as a potential publisher for your paper. However, there are several concerns regarding the paper that need to be addressed before it can be published in our journal. The main issue is that there is no clear connection between the results presented in the paper and the aim of the Journal of Sustainability. The only mention of sustainability is found in the conclusion section, where the authors state that the research "may help assess whether newly built homes can meet the local living culture, thereby contributing to sustainable development." It is not clear how the results of the research support this claim. After reading the paper, it is difficult to determine the significance of the findings in terms of sustainability and sustainable development. The authors need to address the question of "So what?" and explain the practical implications of their results for sustainable development.

Another concern is the generality of the research questions. For example, the first research question asks whether earth dwellings in the Inner Mongolia section of the Yellow River Basin exhibit similar spatial organizational patterns. However, it is not clear how answering this question would benefit the housing industry or contribute to sustainable development. Similarly, the second research question asks about the characteristics of these spatial organizational patterns, but it is not explained how understanding these characteristics would help with sustainable development. The authors should provide a clear rationale for these research questions and connect them more explicitly to the field of sustainability, perhaps by examining the results through the lens of culture.

In terms of the structure and content of the paper, the introduction and literature review contain historical information that does not seem relevant or connected to the rest of the paper. It would be helpful if the authors provided a review of housing typology, including visual examples such as plans, to establish a better context for the research.

The section on residential classification is confusing due to a lack of visual examples. It would greatly improve clarity if the authors restructured this section and included more figures and diagrams to illustrate the spatial configuration of the classifications.

On page 4, there is a reference to "plan" or "plane." Please verify and correct any inconsistencies.

Regarding page 11, line 344, it is unclear why the sleeping areas are more likely to become the central areas. The authors should provide an explanation or further analysis to support this statement.

Please check the figures and their headings' numbers for accuracy.

Overall, it is necessary to restructure the paper to align it more closely with the aims and scope of the Journal of Sustainability. Addressing the concerns raised and providing a stronger connection between the research results and sustainable development will enhance the paper's suitability for publication.