Study on Rural Planning in Plain and Lake Area from the Perspective of Spatial Resilience
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The text touches an interesting issue – “the stability of rural ecological 11
space and […] the construction and development of green and livable villages.” However, in the current version, there are significant shortcomings that must be addressed before a resubmission.
The starting paragraphs and even the Abstract are not motivating. It is hard to follow even the used definition of resilience, economic development or the followed concept of rural spatial resilience. After a couple of readings, I cannot relate the impact these concepts and their relevance to the empirical sections. The Introduction (and even the Abstract) raises issues which are not revisited through the remaining sections. The Review of Literature does not provide a well-defined direction toward the relevance of the empirical section, and it does not motivate the Reader for a well-defined set of Assumptions and Hypotheses. I suggest Authors to use clarifying tables for synthesizing their findings through the Literature. I call also the attention there are works pointing in diverse directions which are not quoted/cited (e.g. Mourao and Martinho, 2016, Mourao and Martinho, 2019).
There appear certain vague sentences along the text, like “. Based on the unit of "village 95
domain", the research of village spatial planning was conducted based on spatial resili- 96
ence.”.” – Other cases are very dubious: “. The paths and methods of rural resilience planning in Hubei plain and 107
lake areas are summarized to construct the resilience mechanism regarding spatial attrib- 108
utes and organizational forms of spatial element.” These two are mere examples among many other critical sentences along the text.
The assumptions supporting the hypotheses must be revised. Through the initial sections it is not clear whether Authors are studying resilience, rural resilience, or spatial resilience. The empirical section needs to be related to an established and robust literature in which the current methods have been discussed in terms of strengths but also weaknesses. There are a few calculations and statistical data exhibited by Authors regarding the spatial autocorrelation analysis (e.g., why not discussing concurrent models like SAC, SAR, Durbin ones, etc).. Table 3 seems a missing piece, without connections with the text.
The use of SEM/PLS-SEM/CFA methods is a potential method and it becomes highly suggested by outcomes tables.
Other issues relate to the weakness of the discussion around the Results and what is the contribution of these findings to the discussion centered on the topic. Actually, which is the linkage between the variables/latent dimensions?
Lastly, additional discussions regarding the convenience of the sample as well as its weaknesses are missing.
English must be revised.
Author Response
Point 1: The starting paragraphs and even the Abstract are not motivating. It is hard to follow even the used definition of resilience, economic development or the followed concept of rural spatial resilience. After a couple of readings, I cannot relate the impact these concepts and their relevance to the empirical sections. The Introduction (and even the Abstract) raises issues which are not revisited through the remaining sections. The Review of Literature does not provide a well-defined direction toward the relevance of the empirical section, and it does not motivate the Reader for a well-defined set of Assumptions and Hypotheses. I suggest Authors to use clarifying tables for synthesizing their findings through the Literature. I call also the attention there are works pointing in diverse directions which are not quoted/cited (e.g. Mourao and Martinho, 2016, Mourao and Martinho, 2019).
Response 1: Thank you for your advice I rewrite theliterature review(L 59-80)，however, I try to find “Mourao and Martinho, 2016, Mourao and Martinho, 2019” but failed, It will be helpful if you could tell me the title of the paper.
Point 2: There appear certain vague sentences along the text, like “. Based on the unit of "village 95
domain", the research of village spatial planning was conducted based on spatial resili- 96
ence.”.” – Other cases are very dubious: “. The paths and methods of rural resilience planning in Hubei plain and 107
lake areas are summarized to construct the resilience mechanism regarding spatial attrib- 108
utes and organizational forms of spatial element.” These two are mere examples among many other critical sentences along the text.
Response 2: I'm sorry, I didn't understand the number in this paragraph
Point 3: The assumptions supporting the hypotheses must be revised. Through the initial sections it is not clear whether Authors are studying resilience, rural resilience, or spatial resilience. The empirical section needs to be related to an established and robust literature in which the current methods have been discussed in terms of strengths but also weaknesses. There are a few calculations and statistical data exhibited by Authors regarding the spatial autocorrelation analysis (e.g., why not discussing concurrent models like SAC, SAR, Durbin ones, etc).. Table 3 seems a missing piece, without connections with the text.
The use of SEM/PLS-SEM/CFA methods is a potential method and it becomes highly suggested by outcomes tables.Other issues relate to the weakness of the discussion around the Results and what is the contribution of these findings to the discussion centered on the topic. Actually, which is the linkage between the variables/latent dimension
Response 3: Thank you for your advice, I modified Table 3. The investigation and analysis process mainly adopts the way of field investigation and qualitative analysis method, I hope quantitative analytical methods can be introduced in following studies.
Point 4:Lastly, additional discussions regarding the convenience of the sample as well as its weaknesses are missing.
Response 4: I add some discussions
Point 5: English must be revised.
Response 5: I tried to adjust the article.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Article review: Study on Rural Planning in Plain and Lake Area: From the Perspective of Spatial Resilience
The authors wrote in the abstract that the purpose of the study is to
"..explored ways to increase the stability of rural ecological space and promote the construction and development of green and livable villages".
The topic is important and necessary . The authors in the article evaluate the agricultural space of Qingyanggang Village region. They point out the environmental consequences of poor space organization and use . In the chapter "discussion" they indicate the need and scope of reconstruction of agricultural space . The new reconstructed space is to have such a layout that will enable the elimination of certain hazards and risks arising from its use, such as those related to environmental pollution, etc.
The concept of the article is very interesting. The authors have adequately described the concepts of spatial resilience of rural areas in the Introduction. The study area and existing use and spatial conditions are also described in great detail. The research is supplemented with diagrams and tables that make it easier to interpret the findings .
However, there is a lack of a clearly written purpose of the study and the methodology that was used.
In the Introduction, it should be written at the end what is the purpose of the study.
A chapter on research methods should be added. You should write what method of analysis was used. Please look you wrote in the abstract "The logic of rural spatial resilience planning was constructed by deductive method." This information is not in the article and should be. Please also add what stages of research were carried out to indicate the spatial resilience of Qingyanggang Village.
You can describe or draw the stages of the research as a diagram of the research . Please note that the titles of some subsections can be stages of the study. E.g. Stage 1: Assessment of agricultural space in terms of topography and landforms, land use including water resources (water network), agricultural use including .........i rural land structure ......
The methodology should be linked to the realization of the purpose of the study, that is, to indicate the spatial resilience of Qingyanggang Village.
Another chapter that needs to be completed is Section 2.2 Survey Data
You wrote that you are using the current topographic map of Qingyanggang Village for your research. This section should list all the data you used in your analysis.
Please look at line 129 you mention in the text about geological prospecting map data of Qingyanggang Village.
Please complete this chapter. Please add all the data. Also missing information in what software you made the maps .
Another thing that needs to be completed is the discussion chapter. In this chapter you presented proposed changes to the space in Qingyanggang Village that are expected to make the space resilience.
In the discussion you should also add the research that has been done by other authors in solving similar problems. I believe that this chapter lacks such considerations (comprehensive whether someone has already analyzed the resilience of rural areas, with similar methods, what results have been obtained ).
Please correct the Figure 4: Current distribution of land resources in Qingyanggang Village. . The descriptions are not written in English.
Author Response
Point 1: In the Introduction, it should be written at the end what is the purpose of the study.
Response 1: I added a paragraph at the end of the introduction to describe the purpose of the study. 101-106
Point 2: A chapter on research methods should be added. You should write what method of analysis was used. Please look you wrote in the abstract "The logic of rural spatial resilience planning was constructed by deductive method." This information is not in the article and should be. Please also add what stages of research were carried out to indicate the spatial resilience of Qingyanggang Village.
You can describe or draw the stages of the research as a diagram of the research . Please note that the titles of some subsections can be stages of the study. E.g. Stage 1: Assessment of agricultural space in terms of topography and landforms, land use including water resources (water network), agricultural use including .........i rural land structure ......
The methodology should be linked to the realization of the purpose of the study, that is, to indicate the spatial resilience of Qingyanggang Village.
Response 2: thank you for your advice，I add Research Framework. 134-150
Point 3: Another chapter that needs to be completed is Section 2.2 Survey Data
You wrote that you are using the current topographic map of Qingyanggang Village for your research. This section should list all the data you used in your analysis.
Please complete this chapter. Please add all the data. Also missing information in what software you made the maps.
Response 3: I add some Survey Data in Section 3.2. Table 6. & Table 7.
Point 4: Another thing that needs to be completed is the discussion chapter. In this chapter you presented proposed changes to the space in Qingyanggang Village that are expected to make the space resilience.
In the discussion you should also add the research that has been done by other authors in solving similar problems. I believe that this chapter lacks such considerations (comprehensive whether someone has already analyzed the resilience of rural areas, with similar methods, what results have been obtained ).
Response 4: I add some research. 356-361
Point 5: Please correct the Figure 4: Current distribution of land resources in Qingyanggang Village. . The descriptions are not written in English
Response 5: Figure 4 as been modified
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Aim of the work is to explore ways to increase the stability of rural ecological space and promote the construction and development of green and livable villages in plain and lake area. Some improvements are required in order to publish the paper:
Abstract
The aim part is missing
The method part (2) is lack of description for the used methodology
Introduction
The rural planning is strongly linked to the Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030 and the related issues about the negative impacts of the urbanization carried out in the XX century. Please, try to associate the research topics to these matters and, in order to facilitate this, you should refer to Urban resilience against natural disasters: Mapping the risk with an innovative indicators-based assessment approach and Resilience of Complex Urban Systems: A Multicriteria Methodology for the Construction of an Assessment Index. In New Metropolitan Perspectives: Post COVID Dynamics: Green and Digital Transition, between Metropolitan and Return to Villages Perspectives (pp. 690-701). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Add the aim of the work at the end of the Introduction section
The literature review is missing
Materials and Methods
The collected data features is missing
The methodology is missing because it seems an analysis of the existent conditions of the lake area, more than an application of a computational methodology for providing the assessment of the resilience level
Author Response
Point 1: Abstract
The aim part is missing
The method part (2) is lack of description for the used methodology
Response 1: I added aim at the end of Abstract，and I rewrite the method.
Point 2: Introduction
The rural planning is strongly linked to the Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030 and the related issues about the negative impacts of the urbanization carried out in the XX century. Please, try to associate the research topics to these matters and, in order to facilitate this, you should refer to Urban resilience against natural disasters: Mapping the risk with an innovative indicators-based assessment approach and Resilience of Complex Urban Systems: A Multicriteria Methodology for the Construction of an Assessment Index. In New Metropolitan Perspectives: Post COVID Dynamics: Green and Digital Transition, between Metropolitan and Return to Villages Perspectives (pp. 690-701). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
The literature review is missing
Response 2: thank you for your advice，I rewrite the literature review. 59-80
Point 3: Add the aim of the work at the end of the Introduction section
Response 3: I added a paragraph at the end of the introduction to describe the purpose of the study. 101-106
Point 4: Materials and Methods
The collected data features is missing
The methodology is missing because it seems an analysis of the existent conditions of the lake area, more than an application of a computational methodology for providing the assessment of the resilience level.
Response 4: I add some Survey Data in Section 3.2. Table 6. & Table 7.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I found the changes marginal. I urge Author/s to reconsider all the previous reviewers' comments.
Let me clarify that the numbers along the quoted text (from the original paper of the Authors) indicate the line according to Sustainability's format.
The suggested literature is the following:
Mourao, P. and V. Martinho 2014: The choices of the fire – Debating socioeconomic determinants of the fires observed at Portuguese municipalities. Forest Policy and Economics, 43, 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.01.007.
Mourao, P. and V. Martinho 2016: Discussing structural breaks in the Portuguese regulation on forest fires – An economic approach. Land Use Policy, 54, 460-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.003.
Author Response
Point 1: I found the changes marginal. I urge Author/s to reconsider all the previous reviewers' comments.
Response 1: The language has been edited.
Reviewer 2s' comments: The authors have addressed all comments . Nevertheless, I would like to ask you to complete comment 3: Section 2.2 has been removed by the authors. I do not know why. The data the authors use are: survey data, spatial data from maps, which we draw in appropriate software (e.g. free Qgis, etc.).
I merged the content of 2.2 into 2.1 in my last revision, refer to your suggestions, section data listed as a subtitle this time. The main data include dwg data and electronic aerial maps, which we processed with AutoCAD（1:1000） and ArcMap(2018); In addition, we conducted a questionnaire survey during the survey process, visiting 238 local villagers, and collected a total of 177 questionnaires.The survey includes the villagers' suggestions on the public facilities, municipal infrastructure, and the public environment in the village.
Reviewer 3s' comments: The efforts made by the Authors are appreciated.
Point 2: Let me clarify that the numbers along the quoted text (from the original paper of the Authors) indicate the line according to Sustainability's format.
The suggested literature is the following:
Mourao, P. and V. Martinho 2014: The choices of the fire – Debating socioeconomic determinants of the fires observed at Portuguese municipalities. Forest Policy and Economics, 43, 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.01.007.
Mourao, P. and V. Martinho 2016: Discussing structural breaks in the Portuguese regulation on forest fires – An economic approach. Land Use Policy, 54, 460-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.03.003.
Response 2: Thank you very much for the recommended literature, I read the literature Debating socioeconomic determinants of the fires observed at Portuguese municipalities, which I could download the full text, it use CART to analyze the de-terminants of the burnt area in Portuguese municipalities，this is really a very good way to analyze it, and I have cited it in my article as an analytical method. However, My professional background is urban and rural planning, and I trying to study on rural planning from the perspective of spatial resilience. Due to the differences in the specialty, I am not good at the analytical models of economics, these analytical methods are not used in my paper.
And I edit the language again.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I thank the authors for improving the article.
The authors have addressed all comments . Nevertheless, I would like to ask you to complete comment 3.
Section 2.2 has been removed by the authors. I do not know why. The data the authors use are: survey data, spatial data from maps, which we draw in appropriate software (e.g. free Qgis, etc.)
Author Response
Point 1: Section 2.2 has been removed by the authors. I do not know why. The data the authors use are: survey data, spatial data from maps, which we draw in appropriate software (e.g. free Qgis, etc.).
Response 1: I merged the content of 2.2 into 2.1 in my last revision, refer to your suggestions, section data listed as a subtitle this time. The main data include dwg data and electronic aerial maps, which we processed with AutoCAD and ArcMap; In addition, we conducted a questionnaire survey during the survey process, visiting 238 local villagers, and collected a total of 177 questionnaires.The survey includes the villagers' suggestions on the public facilities, municipal infrastructure, and the public environment in the village.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The efforts made by the Authors are apprecciated.
Author Response
Point 1: The efforts made by the Authors are appreciated.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your comments.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Changes are fine now.
