How to Measure the Impact of Walking Accessibility of Suburban Rail Station Catchment Areas on the Commercial Premium Benefits of Joint Development
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a well-prepared study realizing clearly its goals. The construction of the paper and the presented methodology are correct. I have only the remarks dedicated to the “background” of the literature review containing similar topics. I think the considered sources should come from more fresh positions and from more different sets of publishers. Especially, the application to the journal “Sustainability” needs more connections with the papers published recently in this journal. For example, using the keywords “Station city integration” we can find 32 articles published in “Sustainability” (including 8 in the year 2022). The use of the keywords “Walking accessibility” indicates 97 articles (including numerous from the Year 2022) and so on. Some of these positions are worth citing and commenting on in the paper. In the end, I have a small technical remark. Please, delete the big empty space between lanes 478 and 479.
Author Response
Coverletter
Dear reviewer:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, and we also appreciate reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “How to measure the impact of walking accessibility of suburban rail station catchment areas on the commercial premium benefits of joint development” (Manuscript Number:sustainability-2220748). In order to make the answers made by the authors more obvious, this article hides the traces of English polishing and modification in the revised part, so that the editor can review the article more clearly. The following are the specific changes we have made in response to your comments:
Reviewer 1 mainly suggested the research results cited in the literature review section of the article and felt that the manuscript should include more novel articles from this journal, as well as analysis for the new ideas they presented.
Point 1: The “background” of the literature review containing similar topics.
Response1：Aiming at the problem of insufficient citations in the background part of the article's introduction and research review, the author used "station-city integration", "walking accessibility", and "premium effect" as keywords to search for relevant literature and read. Combined with the point of view of this article, the selected articles are cited to explain in more detail the problems that have not been clarified. The cited articles include, but are not limited to, excellent articles in the "Sustainability" magazine, where they appear in the article and the viewpoints cited are as follows:
Line 92- 96, [4]: The accessibility of stations is usually improved by reducing the actual walking distance within the rail station area.
Line 110- 115, [5]: The role of station-city integration facilities in the development of station-city integration.
Line 167- 169, [11]: The premium effect due to rail transit will vary with the price and type of residential properties.
Line 190- 192, [20]: The premium effect generated by polycentric cities is more obvious.
Line 243- 244, [28]: The integrated development of station and city can improve the walking accessibility between the station and the city, thereby promoting pedestrians' willingness to travel.
Line 250- 253, [33]: A continuous three-dimensional network of pedestrian bridges, underpasses, and surface paths can significantly improve pedestrian accessibility.
Line 413- 425, [43- 45]: The characteristics of spatial econometric model and cost-benefit analysis are explained, as well as the theoretical basis for their combined use.
Line 499- 501, [47- 50]: Added a description of the characteristic variables that affect real estate prices.
Line 549- 555, [51- 53]: Description of data filtering.
Line 766- 769, [56- 57]: Elaboration of the general service life of pedestrian bridges to illustrate that pedestrian bridge construction can continue to be profitable for a longer period of time.
Point 2: Delete the big empty space between lanes 478 and 479(The original version).
Response 2: We removed the white space between lines 478-479 to make the article cleaner.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The thesis studies the influence of the proximity of train stations in the suburbs of Tokyo, Japan, on the effectiveness of developers, and the topic is relevant to reality.
2. The graphs and charts of the paper are detailed and provide support for the textual content, but considering the reliability of the data sources of the graphs and charts, it is suggested that the authors should add the corresponding graphical sources under each graph.
3. In the textual presentation, it is suggested that the authors focus on the literature review to add the relevant studies on the explanatory variables and the explained variables, and the empirical analysis selects 650, 800, 1000, 1200 and 1500 m as the distance thresholds respectively, and the reasons for the selection should be specified.
4. The article uses spatial econometric model and combines cost-benefit analysis to conduct empirical research, but whether the overall model integration of the paper is supported by the corresponding strong literature, and the process of screening data to exclude special neighborhoods, whether the resulting empirical results are reliable, and whether the conclusions have a certain degree of soundness.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
On behalf of my co-authors, we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, and we also appreciate reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “How to measure the impact of walking accessibility of suburban rail station catchment areas on the commercial premium benefits of joint development” (Manuscript Number: sustainability-2220748). In order to make the answers made by the authors more obvious, this article hides the traces of English polishing and modification in the revised part, so that the editor can review the article more clearly. The following are the specific changes we have made in response to your comments:
Reviewer 2 mainly suggested changes to the manuscript with respect to the source of the graphs and figures, the available literature studies on the variables considered in the model construction process, the reasons for the selection of specific distance values in the construction of the spatial weight matrix, the basis for the combination of the spatial econometric regression model and the cost-effectiveness model, the reasons for screening the sample data beyond the specific distances, and the reasonableness of the conclusions obtained.
Reviewer 2:
Point 1: The thesis studies the influence of the proximity of train stations in the suburbs of Tokyo, Japan, on the effectiveness of developers, and the topic is relevant to reality.
Response 1: The article further discusses the station-city integration and walking accessibility, which makes the research goal of this article clearer.
Point 2: The graphs and charts of the paper are detailed and provide support for the textual content, but considering the reliability of the data sources of the graphs and charts, it is suggested that the authors should add the corresponding graphical sources under each graph.
Response 2: The author has marked the specific source for each chart that appears in the article to ensure the authenticity of the data and conclusions.
Point 3: In the textual presentation, it is suggested that the authors focus on the literature review to add the relevant studies on the explanatory variables and the explained variables.
Response 3: In response to the second reviewer's suggestion to add a review of the literature on explanatory and explained variables, we have made appropriate additions here and broadly listed the characteristic variables that have been considered in previous studies on related topics, while the explained variables have been discussed more systematically in Section 1, and a new section of recent research has been added to improve the discussion on the explained variables.
Point 4: The empirical analysis selects 650, 800, 1000, 1200 and 1500 m as the distance thresholds respectively, and the reasons for the selection should be specified.
Response 4: First, before constructing the spatial measure regression model, the appropriate spatial weight matrix needs to be selected, and there are three main methods, the neighborhood method, the distance threshold weight method, and the K-means method, among which, the distance threshold weight method is mostly used for the construction of the spatial weight matrix of point samples, but the selection of the distance threshold needs to be compared to select the most suitable distance value to ensure that this spatial weight matrix can be maximally The spatial autocorrelation of the samples is reflected to the maximum extent. In this study, 650, 800, 1000, 1200, 1500, and 2000 m were chosen as the modulus for the construction of the spatial weight matrix, where 650 m was actually the minimum distance that could be calculated automatically by the software to ensure that each sample could be surrounded by a neighboring sample (the integer was taken here for the convenience of calculation, but it did not affect the analysis results), and this value is not absolute, and the reason for choosing 200 m here is that the selected samples are located around the suburban routes, and a review of the local road network through Google Earth reveals that 200 m roughly matches its neighborhood design scale and ensures that at least one sample will be distributed at every 200 m interval). In general, when the distance threshold is set beyond the minimum value, the results obtained by selecting different distance values to construct the spatial weight matrix and performing correlation analysis will first become larger and then smaller, so it is effective to select the relatively best spatial weight matrix by setting different distance values.
Point 5: The article uses spatial econometric model and combines cost-benefit analysis to conduct empirical research, but whether the overall model integration of the paper is supported by the corresponding strong literature.
Response 5: In lines 413-425 of the article, the article cites three classic articles to explain the characteristics of the spatial econometric model and cost-benefit analysis. The basis for the combination of the two models in this article is to use the results of the spatial econometric model as economic benefits For the sample data in the benefit analysis, the relationship between the two models is used progressively, and there is no interleaved use. And the research focus of the article is the economic problem in the space, and the quantitative analysis can be carried out more accurately by combining the respective characteristics of the two models.
Point 6: the process of screening data to exclude special neighborhoods
Response 6: For the screening of data, it is explained in lines 549-555 of the article. Since the selected area for the study is located in the suburbs of the city, the urban construction density is low, and the main samples are concentrated around the station. If the samples that are far away are not screened It will lead to inaccurate results. At the same time, considering the limits of comfortable walking distance, the data within 2000 meters of the selected site are used as samples.
Point 7: whether the resulting empirical results are reliable, and whether the conclusions have a certain degree of soundness.
Response 7: On the question of whether the empirical results are reliable, the article have added two aspects to the discussion. Firstly, in lines 766-778, the article have cited research literature and reports to illustrate the construction cost and service life of pedestrian bridges. As a type of transportation infrastructure led and invested by the government, the service life of pedestrian bridges is generally around 50 years, and the main cost investment during this period is the operation and maintenance cost. For a limited period of use, if the pedestrian bridge is solely used to guide people across the street, it will only generate social value and needs to be evaluated further by calculating the gross social product to assess the economic benefits it generates. However, this approach is not intuitive, and it is generally difficult to recover construction costs in the short term, resulting in this type of project usually being in a loss-making situation. On the other hand, if the pedestrian bridge is linked to ancillary commercial development, it can generate direct economic benefits and quickly recoup the construction costs. Secondly, the study also incorporates a case study from the group's previous research to further demonstrate the need for this construction approach. In lines 779-798, we systematically present how the BRT station of municipal government service center, Xiamen Lifespace shopping mall, and Xiamen Wuyuanwan Tianhong shopping mall are connected by pedestrian bridge facilities over a period of about 7 years. And to a greater extent after the completion of construction, the original BRT passenger flow was converted into commercial consumer flow, creating a significant economic value in just one year. Although BRT stations are different from subway stations and are far inferior to the latter in terms of passenger flow scale, replacing the target with an elevated subway station should generate even more significant premium benefits for the commercial facilities of the attached development.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All of my remarks were considered and effectively introduced. I have no additional remarks and I think that this manuscript is ready for publishing.
Author Response
Firstly, We appreciate your recognition of our work and believe that our collaboration and joint efforts will facilitate the publication of this article, Secondly, We have revised some parts of the article again based on the opinions of other reviewers and the suggestions of the editor, and believe that it has made more progress than the initial version.
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The paper first improves the classical characteristic price model based on the spatial econometric model, in which the modeling process for the spatial econometric regression is described rather briefly and further improvement is recommended. For example, it can be combined with the form of flowchart for logical rationalization.
2. The paper has a complete structure and good format, but there is a garbled code in lines 341-347 of the paper, so pay attention to the correction.
3. The thesis studies the influence of the distance near the train station on the developer's efficiency in the suburbs of Tokyo, Japan. The topic chosen is close to reality, and the thesis research is practical, but the thesis has less description of the practical significance, and it is suggested to further explain the thesis' practical significance for social development.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: The paper first improves the classical characteristic price model based on the spatial econometric model, in which the modeling process for the spatial econometric regression is described rather briefly and further improvement is recommended. For example, it can be combined with the form of flowchart for logical rationalization.
Response 1: The article has supplemented more details on the construction process of the two classic models of spatial econometric regression in Section 2.1, lines 336 to 359. It includes the coefficient selection, coefficient comparison process, and the application of spatial econometric models, and points out the reason for choosing it in this paper. Finally, a flow chart of the spatial econometric regression model form selection is added to make this issue clearer.
Point 2: The paper has a complete structure and good format, but there is a garbled code in lines 341-347 of the paper, so pay attention to the correction.
Response 2: The article has revised the garbled code in lines 341-347, and gave comments at the corresponding position. The revised content is in lines 360-363.
Point 3: The thesis studies the influence of the distance near the train station on the developer's efficiency in the suburbs of Tokyo, Japan. The topic chosen is close to reality, and the thesis research is practical, but the thesis has less description of the practical significance, and it is suggested to further explain the thesis' practical significance for social development.
Response 3: The article has added the practical application significance and the impact on social development of this study in the discussion section, lines 909-941, which mainly includes two aspects: (1) The research conclusions have significant practical application reference value for multiple subjects, including the government and urban planning designers. It can help the government to conduct more effective feasibility analysis and investment return estimation for the construction of transportation infrastructure when carrying out urban planning and construction. This will help to further control the cost and avoid resource waste. Meanwhile, it also further improves the development level of urban rail transit station-city integration from the perspective of practical facility construction. This will help to promote the sustainable development of the city; (2) The satisfaction of walkability is the basic demand of pedestrians in the rail transit station area, which can further stimulate the satisfaction of higher-level needs and promote the occurrence of other urban activities. This kind of research from the perspective of walking subjects is very consistent with the people-oriented urban development policy, so it also has a positive promotion significance for social development.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
