Partitioned Simulation of Land Use Change Based on Carbon Neutrality Zoning and Its Multiscale Effect on Carbon Emissions in the Xia–Zhang–Quan Metropolitan Circle, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis study is quite intriguing, focusing on land use changes and their role in carbon emissions. The research uses the Xia-Zhang-Quan urban cluster as the study area. The lean and tall structure is clear and direct, enhancing its readability. The reviewer has the following comments for the author’s reference:
- The current version of the abstract does not sufficiently clarify the research question and background of this study.
- The model in the article shows that new construction may encroach on land previously used for agriculture. However, to the reviewer’s knowledge, such a transition is strictly regulated in mainland China.
- The current academic community has many studies using the PLUS model to discuss similar issues. The reviewer suggests that the researcher conduct a comprehensive review of these studies and further highlight the theoretical and model innovation of this study.
- The manuscript needs to fully explain the settings of the three scenarios and the references for setting these scenarios. The current discussion in the Method section is not sufficient.
- The model in the manuscript uses carbon emission data from 2017 as input, which seems a bit outdated: the reviewer believes that the region has undergone continuous industrial transformation in the past 7 years, as well as structural changes in residents’ lifestyles after the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the persuasiveness of the discussion based on this data may be questioned.
- The manuscript would benefit from further discussing how the findings of the research can be applied in regional planning in other areas and countries around the world (not just limited to China or the Xia-Zhang-Quan area).
Author Response
Reviewer #1:
Reviewer #1: This study is quite intriguing, focusing on land use changes and their role in carbon emissions. The research uses the Xia-Zhang-Quan urban cluster as the study area. The lean and tall structure is clear and direct, enhancing its readability. The reviewer has the following comments for the author’s reference:
- The current version of the abstract does not sufficiently clarify the research question and background of this study.
Responses: Thanks for your professional comment. We revised the Abstract section, especially clearly explaining the research question and background. Please refer to the following text.
Urbanization significantly affects the global carbon balance. Therefore, clarifying the effect of urbanization-induced land use change on carbon emissions and proposing zonal-based policy implementation became crucial. In this background, we estimated the future land use carbon emissions in three scenarios by adopting the partitioned Patch-generating Land Use Simulation Model (PLUS) in the Xiamen–Zhangzhou–Quanzhou (XZQ) metropolitan circle, China. The results showed that: (1) the region can divide into two sub-areas (carbon sink function zone and high-carbon optimization zone); the partitioned PLUS model has higher accuracy in the developed areas, whereas it is worse in undeveloped areas; (2) the main characteristic of land use change was the construction on the land that was previously farmland, reaching 260.2 km2; the land used for construction would continue to expand, with 215.5 km2 (8.2%), 261.0 km2 (9.9%), and 129.5 km2 (4.9%) in the natural development scenario (ND), economic development scenario (ED), and carbon neutrality scenario (CN), respectively; (3) the amount of carbon emissions would increase by 196.2×104 tons and 235.4×104 tons in the ND and ED, respectively; whereas, it would decrease by 49.0×104 tons in the CN. The findings suggest a method for the coordinated development between the carbon sink function zone and the high-carbon optimization zone.
Please see page 1 of the revised manuscript, lines 12-26.
- The model in the article shows that new construction may encroach on land previously used for agriculture. However, to the reviewer’s knowledge, such a transition is strictly regulated in mainland China.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. Indeed, mainland China has implemented a series of strict ecological and environmental protection policies, such as capital farmland, cultivated land balance, etc. However, the effect of the policy is discounted. Therefore, it is persuasive that new construction tends to occupy the land previously used for agriculture. The relevant research results also confirm this point.
Liu, J.; Peng, K.; Zuo, C.; Li, Q. Spatiotemporal variation of land-use carbon emissions and its implications for low carbon and ecological civilization strategies: Evidence from Xiamen-Zhangzhou-Quanzhou metropolitan circle, China. Sustainable Cities and Society 2022, 86, doi:10.1016/j.scs.2022.104083.
Hu, X.; Li, Z.; Cai, Y.; Wu, F. Urban construction land demand prediction and spatial pattern simulation under carbon peak and neutrality goals: A case study of Guangzhou, China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2022, 32, 2251-2270, doi:10.1007/s11442-022-2046-x.
Wen, D.; Wang, X.; Liu, J.; Xu, N.; Zhou, W.; Hong, M. Maintaining key ecosystem services under multiple development scenarios: A case study in Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao greater bay Area, China. Ecological Indicators 2023, 154, 110691.
- The current academic community has many studies using the PLUS model to discuss similar issues. The reviewer suggests that the researcher conduct a comprehensive review of these studies and further highlight the theoretical and model innovation of this study.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We reviewed the related studies and highlighted the theoretical innovation of this study.
Numerous studies have explored the relationship between future land use change and carbon storage/carbon emission by adopting PLUS[30-32]. However, fewer studies paid attention to the effect of spatial heterogeneity on the performance of PLUS.
Please see page 2 of the revised manuscript, lines 69-72.
- The manuscript needs to fully explain the settings of the three scenarios and the references for setting these scenarios. The current discussion in the Method section is not sufficient.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We enriched the introduction of the 3 scenarios. Additionally, the reference was added.
Liu, J.; Peng, K.; Zuo, C.; Li, Q., Spatiotemporal variation of land-use carbon emissions and its implications for low carbon and ecological civilization strategies: Evidence from Xiamen-Zhangzhou-Quanzhou metropolitan circle, China. Sustainable Cities and Society 2022, 86.
Please see page 6 of the revised manuscript, lines 179-197.
- The model in the manuscript uses carbon emission data from 2017 as input, which seems a bit outdated: the reviewer believes that the region has undergone continuous industrial transformation in the past 7 years, as well as structural changes in residents’ lifestyles after the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the persuasiveness of the discussion based on this data may be questioned.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. Specifically, the carbon emission data in 2017 was 3 years later than land use data in 2020. From 2018 to 2020, the residents’ lifestyles changed obviously. Statistical data displayed that the added value of industrial enterprises exhibited a rising trend. This means that the carbon emission in urban areas was still greater than in the village. Furthermore, the carbon emission data was used for partition. The change in regional carbon emissions in the same direction has a limited impact on zoning results. So, we infer that the data is reliable.
Throughout 2018, the added value of industrial enterprises above the designated size reached 1611.35 billion yuan. In 2019, the value was 1749.93. In 2020, the value was 1925.86. (Data from Xiamen Municipal People's Government)
- The manuscript would benefit from further discussing how the findings of the research can be applied in regional planning in other areas and countries around the world (not just limited to China or the Xia-Zhang-Quan area).
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We added the meaningful for other similar regions.
Countries around the world have successively formulated carbon neutrality measures. Though urban growth patterns and changes were different in the urban agglomerations, regional differences objectively exist[52]. The carbon neutrality strategy can provides references for similar regions. Zone based policy implementation, the coordinated development between carbon sink function zone and high-carbon optimization zone would be meaningful.
Please see page 13 of the revised manuscript, lines 371-376.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The article: “Partitioned simulation of land use change based on carbon neutrality zoning and its multi-scale effect on carbon emissions in the metropolitan circle, China “contributes to innovation in urban planning and climate change mitigation. Addressing the highlighted gaps could improve the manuscript further.
I make a few observations, and which can be used in the improvement of the article as given hereunder:
General comments
l Statement in Line 37-38; 49-50 is hanging
l Can delete “in this study” on line 101
l Check the use of verb economically on line 47
l Did you mean to say “Models” (which I believe should be) on sub heading 2.3.?. Secondly the subtitles numbered 1-3 under 2.3.2 should instead sequentially be edited to heading four hence 2.3.2.1…………….2.3.2.3
n Need to be more precise and explicit on the recommendation on line 371-374
Specific comments
1. Are sections well developed
The sections are well developed but some gaps on explanation of scenario planning (socio economic pathways (SSP)/ policies and or/ Representative Concentration Pathways
2. Is the literature well synthesized
The literature could well be synthesized if historical context and strategic land use goals in the study area/ China could briefly be explained and well-integrated into the problem statement, as well as discussion and conclusions.
3. Does the author(s) answer the questions he/she sought to answer
The authors have made a good attempt at answering the questions they sought to answer. However, to improve the manuscript, I suggest that the authors ask and attempt to answer the question “why and how is scenario conceptualized? In most scenario planning studies, different socio-economic pathways and/ or Representative Concentration Pathways and how they unfold against existing (Business as Usual) as a baseline are examined. Exploratory assessment of various policies named in line 334-, land consolidation etc.), are some of the policy pathways and historical context (strategic goals) that could enrich the analysis and comparison between exploratory (emerging trends and uncertainties) and/or normative (what should be) scenarios. I believe such an approach can better contribute to advancement of knowledge and inform policy and practice.
4. Is the method well explained:
The used methods are well explained. However, limiting the study to 2020 limits the utility of the findings (Why for example, are the authors not using scenarios into 2030; 2050 and 2100). Such scenarios could better provide extend knowledge, inform policy and practice, as critical pillars in research.
5. Is the article well written and well understood
Except for the gaps on SSP scenarios, the article is well written and can be well understood.
Concluding remarks
Scenario planning as implied in this study has emerged as a powerful planning tool. Though the study is well presented, gaps on why restricting the scenarios to 2020 raises some questions that need to be addressed.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Only minor editing on English language required
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
Reviewer #2: “Partitioned simulation of land use change based on carbon neutrality zoning and its multi-scale effect on carbon emissions in the metropolitan circle, China “contributes to innovation in urban planning and climate change mitigation. Addressing the highlighted gaps could improve the manuscript further.
- Statement in Line 37-38; 49-50 is hanging
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We revised this section.
Please see page 1 of the revised manuscript, lines 39-41, and page 2, lines 51-54.
- Can delete “in this study” on line 101
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We delete “in this study” on line 101.
- Check the use of verb economically on line 47
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We delete “in this study” on line 101.
Please see page 2 of the revised manuscript, lines 48-50.
- Did you mean to say “Models” (which I believe should be) on sub heading 2.3.?. Secondly the subtitles numbered 1-3 under 2.3.2 should instead sequentially be edited to heading four hence 2.3.2.1…………….2.3.2.3
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We reorganized.
- Materials and Methods
2.1. Study area
2.2. Data sources
2.3. Partitions based on carbon neutrality
2.4. PLUS model
2.4.1. Driving forces selected
2.4.2. Scenario simulation
2.4.3. Other key parameters in PLUS model
2.4.4. Model validation
2.5. Carbon emission estimation
- Need to be more precise and explicit on the recommendation on line 371-374
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We have revised it.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsRational urban planning is crucial to reduce carbon emissions to achieve carbon neutrality.This article estimates future land use carbon emissions in three scenarios, providing a direction for coordinated development between cities, especially the integrated development of coastal and inland areas. I think the paper is of good quality and can be accepted after a minor revision. The suggest are listed as follows:
1.L111:The figures in your paper are a bit blurry. Please consider replacing them with clearer ones.
2.L171:Is there a specific basis for this? It is mentioned here that 13 factors were filtered after taking into account the various influencing factors and their availability, is there a specific basis for the filtering?
3.L259:Add a separator for the numbers over 1,000. Check all numbers including those in tables/figures.
4.L153:The land use data in this article is selected from 2020, and the county-level carbon dioxide emissions and carbon sequestration data is selected from 2017. In recent years, will the rapid development of society have an impact on the results?
5.L109-111:Fig. in the text Figure 1. should correspond to the title of the image.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Reviewer #3:
Reviewer #3: Rational urban planning is crucial to reduce carbon emissions to achieve carbon neutrality. This article estimates future land use carbon emissions in three scenarios, providing a direction for coordinated development between cities, especially the integrated development of coastal and inland areas. I think the paper is of good quality and can be accepted after a minor revision. The suggest are listed as follows:
- L111:The figures in your paper are a bit blurry. Please consider replacing them with clearer ones.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We have redrawn Fig.1.
- L171:Is there a specific basis for this? It is mentioned here that 13 factors were filtered after taking into account the various influencing factors and their availability, is there a specific basis for the filtering?
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. In China, land use change is closely related to the natural environment, traffic location, social economy, and policy. According to previous studies, we finally selected 13 driving factors in 2020 with a strong correlation with land change.
Please see page 5 of the revised manuscript, lines 171-176.
- L259:Add a separator for the numbers over 1,000. Check all numbers including those in tables/figures.
Responses: Thanks for your professional comment. We check the issue throughout this
manuscript.
- L153:The land use data in this article is selected from 2020, and the county-level carbon dioxide emissions and carbon sequestration data is selected from 2017. In recent years, will the rapid development of society have an impact on the results?
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. Specifically, the carbon emission data in 2017 was 3 years later than land use data in 2020. From 2018 to 2020, the residents’ lifestyles changed obviously. Statistical data displayed that the added value of industrial enterprises exhibited a rising trend. This means the carbon emission in urban areas was still greater than in the village. Furthermore, the carbon emission data was used for partition. The change in regional carbon emissions in the same direction has a limited impact on zoning results. So, we infer that the data is reliable.
- L109-111:Fig. in the text Figure 1. should correspond to the title of the image.
Responses: Thanks for your professional comment. We have revised this issue.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author’s revisions to the manuscript significantly improved its quality. The reviewer believes that this study has great potential to contribute to policy formulation and sustainable practices in rapidly developing regions.
1. Regarding the discussion of the PLUS framework for carbon emission forecasting in the previous revision, the reviewer suggests that the author expand on this section with 1-2 additional sentences. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to highlight the unique aspects and innovations of this study.
2. In terms of the scenario setup section, the manuscript’s discussion is clear and effective. However, the reviewer recommends referencing recent practical research and similar scenario setups to enhance the rationale behind the chosen scenarios. For instance, Li et al. (2024) applied a similar scenario setup in their study titled “Nature-based solutions for fast-growing city regions: a new spatial equilibrium model for complementary urban green space planning,” which could greatly inform the discussion in this research.
3. Acknowledging the use of data from 2017 due to limited data availability, the reviewer suggests that the author include a paragraph in the Discussion section discussing the data limitations. Additionally, if possible, the author could explore potential future data sources to guide future research directions.
Author Response
Reviewer #1: The author’s revisions to the manuscript significantly improved its quality. The reviewer believes that this study has great potential to contribute to policy formulation and sustainable practices in rapidly developing regions.
- Regarding the discussion of the PLUS framework for carbon emission forecasting in the previous revision, the reviewer suggests that the author expand on this section with 1-2 additional sentences. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to highlight the unique aspects and innovations of this study.
Responses: Thanks for your professional comment. We reviewed the related studies.
Numerous studies have explored the relationship between future land use change and carbon storage/carbon emission across different spatial scales by adopting PLUS [30-32]. For instance, there is a significant difference in carbon stock under business as usual (BAU) and protected forest (PF) scenarios at Trees Lagoas, with 2.48 Tg [33]. Similarly, carbon storage tends to increase in the BAU scenario in the Sanjiangyuan Area [34]. Heterogeneity characteristics of carbon emissions were crucial to formulating carbon reduction strategies, especially in urban agglomerations [35]. Previous studies generally considered the heterogeneity from the perspective of socioeconomic, topographic features, and climate [36-38]. Recently, increasing studies have tended to investigate carbon zones [39, 40]. However, a few studies paid attention to the effect of spatial heterogeneity in the context of carbon zones on the performance of PLUS.
Please see page 2 of the revised manuscript, lines 70-80.
- In terms of the scenario setup section, the manuscript’s discussion is clear and effective. However, the reviewer recommends referencing recent practical research and similar scenario setups to enhance the rationale behind the chosen scenarios. For instance, Li et al. (2024) applied a similar scenario setup in their study titled “Nature-based solutions for fast-growing city regions: a new spatial equilibrium model for complementary urban green space planning,” which could greatly inform the discussion in this research.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We added some related studies. For the paper mentioned above, maybe have not yet indexed.
Li, H. R.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y. X.; Li, X. X.; Yan, S. Y.; Zheng, X., How to Realize Synergistic Emission Reduction in Future Urban Agglomerations: Spatial Planning Approaches to Reducing Carbon Emissions from Land Use: A Case Study of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region. Land 2024, 13, (4).
Liu, C.; Wang, X. M.; Li, H. Y., County-Level Land Use Carbon Budget in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, China: Spatiotemporal Differentiation and Coordination Zoning. Land 2024, 13, (2).
Please see page 12 of the revised manuscript, lines 327.
- Acknowledging the use of data from 2017 due to limited data availability, the reviewer suggests that the author include a paragraph in the Discussion section discussing the data limitations. Additionally, if possible, the author could explore potential future data sources to guide future research directions.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. We added the limitation in the manuscript.
Here are some limitations in this study. Firstly, the selected county-level CO2 emissions and sequestration data in 2017 was applied due to limited data availability. It might be slightly different from those in 2020.
Please see page 14 of the revised manuscript, lines 384-386.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revised manuscript has well addressed the concerns and the reviewer suggests accepting the manuscript.
Author Response
Responses to Reviewers——Partitioned simulation of land use change based on carbon neutrality zoning and its multiscale effect on carbon emissions in the Xia–Zhang–Quan metropolitan circle, China
Dear Editor:
Thank you for your letter and the reviewers’ insightful and professional comments concerning manuscript. Those comments are very valuable and helpful for improving our manuscript as supporting our future researches research. We have carefully studied the comments and made revisions following the reviewers’ comments. All changes have been noted in red color in the revised version.
Reviewer #1:
Reviewer #1: 1. Improving the written English. There remain some awkward phrases that need to be rectified. For example, in the abstract ''In this background'' is not something that is said in English. Perhaps ''With this background''? Or better yet simply delete the phrase.
Responses: Thanks for your professional comment. We changed “In this background” into “In this study” in the revised version, and further checked the whole manuscript and made necessary revisions for the written English.
- 2. Add some text in the conclusion and abstract on the implications of the work for the current literature, future research, and policy.
Responses: Thanks for your suggestion. Implication was added in the conclusion and abstract.
In the abstract section:
“Comprehensively understanding the land use change and their effects on carbon emissions from this study could provide important insights into carbon neutrality and regional sustainable de-velopment for urban planners and policymakers.”
In the conclusion:
Please see page 1 of the revised manuscript, lines 26-29.
“Comprehensively understanding the land use change and their effects on carbon emis-sions was beneficial to achieve carbon neutrality and regional sustainable devel-op-ment.”
Please see page 14 of the revised manuscript, lines 419-421.
Thanks again.
We hope the revised paper will meet the publication standard of Sustainability. Please let us know if anything else is needed and we look forward to hearing from you. We would like to thank the referee again for taking the time to review our manuscript.
Yours sincerely
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
