Analysis of Land Use Change and Its Economic and Ecological Value under the Optimal Scenario and Green Development Advancement Policy: A Case Study of Hechi, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper, a land value assessment framework that considers the impacts of future land use change is developed by combining multiobjective programming and patch-generating land use simulation models, which is useful for predicting land use changes. This framework is effective in different development strategy contexts. However, the novelty seems to be limited. Significant improvements (major revisions) are needed:

1.A deep literature review should be given. Selecting an appropriate method is essential to assess the importance of land use and ecological value. Model construction methods from previous studies should be reviewed. Eg,10.1016/j.jag.2021.102475, 10.3390/su12041576, 10.1007/s11442-020-1751-6, 10.1007/s11442-023-2082-1, 10.1038/495305a.

2. In Figure 5, the color of the figure is not distinct enough, it is recommended to adjust it.

3. I suggest maintaining consistent colors for the figures presented throughout this paper, which  ensures visual coherence and clarity for readers.

4. In section 4.2, analysis of GDP factor, the statement " most cropland expansion occurs in urban or rural areas" is ambiguous. Are you intending to convey that "farmland expansion primarily transpires in regions characterized by frequent human activities"?

5. In section 3.1.2(3), why was the buffer zone established at 60 meters?

6.In section 4.3, the analysis of the spatial distribution characteristics of land use change should be expanded rather than just focusing on changes in land area.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is good.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic of analyzing land use change and its economic and ecological value, especially under the framework of the Green Development Advancement Policy (GDAP), presents a valuable and timely research area. After a thorough review, I find the concept intriguing but believe the paper requires significant revisions for clarity, structure, and detailed justification of the chosen methods and analysis. Below are detailed suggestions to strengthen the manuscript before reconsideration:

1. (1) What gaps in the existing literature does your study fill?

2. (2) Provide a detailed rationale for selecting your methodological approach over others. What advantages does your chosen method offer, and why is it the most suitable for addressing your research questions?

3. (3)Reconsider the structure of the paper to enhance its logical flow. The methodology should be comprehensively explained before introducing case studies to help readers understand the analytical foundation of your work.

4. (4) Equations should be clearly presented with all parameters defined upfront. Follow this by explaining how you determined these parameters.
   (5) Separating the case study from the methodology section will also help clarify the application of your equations.

5. (6) The influence of GDAP is mentioned in the title, but it appears underexplored in sections 2 to 4. Please elaborate on the specific policies considered, their relevance to your study, and how they are integrated into your scenarios.

6. (7) In reference to the sentence on parameter selection for simulations, provide a detailed explanation of how these parameters were chosen.
   (8) Each parameter in Eq. (3) and other equations throughout the paper needs a clear definition and justification for its inclusion.

7. (9) Streamline the discussion and conclusion sections to eliminate redundancy. Ensure that each point made adds value to the reader's understanding of your study's findings and implications.

8. (10) Clarify what constitutes an "optimal scenario" within the context of your study. How are these scenarios defined, and on what criteria are they based?

9. (11) Explain the rationale for selecting your four scenarios. Which scenario aligns most closely with historical data, and why were these particular scenarios chosen for analysis?

10. (12)Detail the derivation of parameters used to calculate ecological value in Eq. (14). What sources or methodologies were employed to ensure their accuracy and relevance?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper reported an interesting study about land use change and its economic and ecological value analysis in China. The manuscript is generally well structured and the results would be helpful in guiding local land management. I suggest that it could be considered for publication after dealing with the following issues:

 

The abstract

L13-18, some data or quantitative results could be added to support the conclusions.

 

The introduction

In the last paragraph of the introduction section (L85-96). Maybe there is no need to describe the methodology in the introduction section; what is more important is the novelty of this study.

 

Materials and methods

Table 1, I suggest to check the time period of these datasets. For example, is the soil type data really from 2020? According to my limited knowledge, most of the soil type data that currently used in China is based on the second national soil survey which is conducted in 1980s and 1990s. Similarly, the soil erosion data and road network also should be checked.

Besides the data time stage, I am curious about how to use the soil type data, which are basically names of different soil types rather than quantitative information like other factors. Maybe some more explanations are needed.

In addition, more information should be added about the soil erosion data. Do the data include specific erosion rate values or just different levels of intensity?      

 

Results

Figure 5, the font size in the figure is too small.

I suggest that the “DEM” should be changed into “Elevation” to describe the local terrain.

 

Discussion

Section 5.2 Potential contribution to local policies and Section 6 Policy recommendations.

These two sections are similar in subject matter, but different in the level of detail. Perhaps they could be merged into one in the discussion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper, a land value assessment framework that considers the impacts of future land use change is developed by combining multiobjective programming and patch-generating land use simulation models, which is useful for predicting land use changes. This framework is effective in different development strategy contexts.The paper has been revised according to the feedback and the modifications are essentially complete. I have no further comments at this time.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English writing and expression in this paper is clear, free of significant errors, and meets the standards required for publication.

Author Response

作者意见与建议：本文通过结合多目标规划和斑块生成土地利用模拟模型，建立了考虑未来土地利用变化影响的土地价值评估框架，对预测土地利用变化具有重要意义。该框架在不同的发展战略背景下是有效的。本文已根据反馈意见进行了修订，修改基本完成。我目前没有进一步的评论。

回应：感谢您的积极反馈，并确认论文已修改到您满意的程度。感谢您的全面审阅以及您为改进手稿所付出的时间。如果您有任何其他问题，请随时与我们联系。

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript still requires significant improvements in clarity and writing quality. Several expressions remain unclear and need further elaboration:

1.The statement "This study can provide information for future regional land management decisions" is unclear. Please specify what kind of information your study provides and how it can be applied to regional land management.

2.The phrase "Despite its mediocre accuracy, this method is able to improve the accuracy of forecasting future land use demand through combination with other methods" needs clarification. Have you compared this method with others? If so, provide details on how you conducted the comparison and the results.

3. The term "local reality" is vague. Please explain what you mean by this and how it relates to your study.

4. The significance of using Hechi City as a case study is not clear. Explain why this city's case is a contribution, what makes it different, and which factors are special in this case.

5. Ensure that numerical expressions are consistent throughout the manuscript. For example, consider using scientific notation and commas appropriately.

6.In Eqs. 3 and 4, it is suggested to use letters instead of numbers. Additionally, provide a table with parameters and their corresponding data sources. The values of these parameters are still unclear. Please explain each parameter and its data source in detail.

7.The issue raised in the previous comment 10 is still unclear. Please address this comment thoroughly.

Overall, while the manuscript has seen some improvement, additional work is needed to ensure clarity and completeness. Addressing these points will significantly enhance the quality of your paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for addressing the previous comments. I appreciate the improvements made so far. However, I find the description of the "optimal scenarios" still lacking in clarity. Given that "optimal scenario" is a key term in the title, it is crucial to provide a clear and comprehensive explanation.

Specifically, what constitutes "optimal"? How are the weights in Eq. (5) justified? Why do you believe the balanced scenario is closer to "optimal" compared to other methods for determining the weights? Is it appropriate to label it as "the optimal scenario"?

Further elaboration on these points would significantly enhance the clarity and rigor of your paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf