Growth Motivation of Urban Agglomerations in Multiscale Spatial Structures from the Perspective of Synergy Theory

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article has problems from framework to logic to form. It is neither a theoretical article nor an empirical article. It has neither found theoretical highlights nor obtained empirical results. I do not recommend that Sustainability accept this article.

Author Response

This article has problems from framework to logic to form. It is neither a theoretical article nor an empirical article. It has neither found theoretical highlights nor obtained empirical results. I do not recommend that Sustainability accept this article.

Response:  We are sorry for did not get appreciation from you. In this paper we tried to elucidate the synergistic relationship between cities, regions and metropolitan (that is the multiscale) while the changes of development factor fluctuation. Synergy plays as the key factor to form the growth motivation for urban agglomeration. This paper adopt methodology is case study to develop the synergistic theory in growth motivation of urban agglomeration in multi-scale spatial structure.

    We have improved the manuscript according to the comments of reviewer. Specially, we emphasize the contributions in theoretical fields in growth motivation of urban agglomeration in the Abstract and Conclusions. Really hoping the revision can be appreciated by you. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. I suggest the author rewrite the abstract. The abstract should highlight the author's contribution and this article's research value, while providing quantitative conclusions.

2. The introduction lacks a review of international research progress.

3. The scientific problem and research objectives to be addressed in this article are not clear.

4. What is the multi-scale "spatial" form of the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration? It was not shown in the text, but was represented by a conceptual diagram.

5. How can synergy theory be applied to the analysis of this article? There seems to be some disconnection in the text.

6. There is a lack of in-depth discussion in the article, which echoes the solution to the scientific problem in this article. It will be compared with other research and focused on discussing an important discovery.

7. Based on the research findings of this article, it is recommended to propose differentiated suggestions or policy implications for optimizing the spatial structure of urban agglomerations.

8. How is multi-scale reflected in this article? In other words, what is the definition of scale in this article?

9. The sources and accuracy of the data used in the article need to be explained in detail.

10. Suggest adding an overview of the research area.

11. Suggest adding a research roadmap or technical flowchart.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

1. I suggest the author rewrite the abstract. The abstract should highlight the author's contribution and this article's research value, while providing quantitative conclusions.

Response: We rewrote the abstract. But, limited to the methodology. No quantitative conclusion be made. We’re sorry. Please see the revision.

2. The introduction lacks a review of international research progress.

Response: We have added the review of international research progress. Line 39-52.

3. The scientific problem and research objectives to be addressed in this article are not clear.

Response: We have added the research questions. See line line 112-118.

4. What is the multi-scale "spatial" form of the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration? It was not shown in the text, but was represented by a conceptual diagram.

Response: We have added content of the multi-scale spatial structure of the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration. We also added a table to further describe it. please See line 171-172. Thank you.

5. How can synergy theory be applied to the analysis of this article? There seems to be some disconnection in the text.

Response: We added the rationales of adaptation to use synergy theory. Please see line 98-102.Thank you.

6. There is a lack of in-depth discussion in the article, which echoes the solution to the scientific problem in this article. It will be compared with other research and focused on discussing an important discovery.

Response: Thank you for your pertinent suggestion. We tried to conduct an in-depth discussion in section 5 and add some previous researches to generate our findings. In section 5, the three sub-sections were answered the three questions that proposed in methodology. Hoping those revisions could meet your requirements. See the red font in the section 5. Mainly in Line 234-239,300-303,313-316,327-329,354-356,369-372,411-413.

 

7. Based on the research findings of this article, it is recommended to propose differentiated suggestions or policy implications for optimizing the spatial structure of urban agglomerations.

Response: We have significantly revised the part of policy implications. Added and deleted the related and unrelated contents. Acceptance of this suggestion to propose differentiated policy implications for optimizing the spatial structure of urban agglomerations. Please to see the revision in section 6. From line 417-467.

8. How is multi-scale reflected in this article? In other words, what is the definition of scale in this article?

Response: We have added the definition in manuscript (line 122-125). We’re sorry for this ambiguity that made you feel confusion. This paper adopted system science to study that what is growth motivation for urban agglomeration. That is, how to from one city, sporadic cities grow into a high structured spatial organization. So we used scale to classify the subsystem of urban agglomeration, i.e. cities, central cities, based on the scale we proposed the conception of spatial synergistic relationships. The significance of scale is the functional differentiation that must be emerged in a complex system. Figure 1,3,4 used industry, population, GDP to reflect the spatial synergistic relationships by the data in multi-scale spatial structure of “urban agglomeration - metropolitan area – central city - small and medium-sized cities”.

 

9. The sources and accuracy of the data used in the article need to be explained in detail.

Response: We have added the data sources under title of tables and figures.

10. Suggest adding an overview of the research area.

Response: We have added an overview of the research area. Please see line 119-121.

11. Suggest adding a research roadmap or technical flowchart.

Response: We have added a research roadmap, line 130. Thank you for your advices.

12.Moderate editing of English language is required.

Response: We sought to a professional editing service. Please see the revision.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is, in my opinion, a successful attempt to describe urban agglomerations from the perspective of synergy theory. The introductory and theoretical parts are based on a sufficient literature review. The spatio-temporal description of the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration is considered successful - the content is accessible, and the figures are clear. The research part has been correctly developed (the only note is the lack of translation for some labels in fig. 6). The discussion section (point 5. Implications) exists and although it is quite poor in literary references, I would consider it sufficient. The conclusion may not be too extensive, but it is correct and sufficient. Footnotes should be corrected (remove exemplary ones) but this does not cause changes in numbering because the proper ones are numbered from 1. Therefore, in my opinion, the article is suitable for publication after minor corrections (rather editorial than substantive).

Author Response

1.The article is, in my opinion, a successful attempt to describe urban agglomerations from the perspective of synergy theory. The introductory and theoretical parts are based on a sufficient literature review. The spatio-temporal description of the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration is considered successful - the content is accessible, and the figures are clear. The research part has been correctly developed (the only note is the lack of translation for some labels in fig. 6).

Response: We have corrected this mistake, see figure 6. Thank you very much.

2.The discussion section (point 5. Implications) exists and although it is quite poor in literary references, I would consider it sufficient.

Response: We have added some references and improve policy implication, see line 417-467, Thank you.

3.The conclusion may not be too extensive, but it is correct and sufficient. Footnotes should be corrected (remove exemplary ones) but this does not cause changes in numbering because the proper ones are numbered from 1. Therefore, in my opinion, the article is suitable for publication after minor corrections (rather editorial than substantive).

Response: We removed exemplary ones. Thank you.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you once again for the opportunity to review this article. However, I believe there are still some major deficiencies that need to be addressed. The following points outline my concerns:

1. The author aims to explore the driving forces behind the multi-scale spatial structure growth of urban agglomerations, but the abstract only mentions the four stages and four types of urban agglomeration development. I am curious about what the “driving forces” actually are?

2. In the introduction, the author discusses the main areas, methods, and data of urban agglomeration research. However, how does this relate to the keyword "driving forces"? Shouldn't the author focus on organizing the text around the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth?

3. Synergy Theory in Urban Agglomeration Systems. Does this section belong to the literature review? I suggest merging it with the introduction. Additionally, I do not find this section to be rich and comprehensive. I would prefer to see the current progress in research on the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth, with synergy theory being only a part of it rather than the entirety.

4. Methodology. The content presented by the author currently does not belong to the research methodology but rather to a general logical reasoning process. I recommend the author focus on synergy theory in this section and construct a theoretical framework for the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth.

5. Unfortunately, in sections four and five, I still do not find a systematic summary of the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth. Formally, the author does not clearly present the “driving forces,” and in terms of content, the author does not provide a comprehensive empirical summary of the “driving forces.” Additionally, the titles of the figures and tables in these sections are confusing, which is problematic for the empirical focus.

6. The article lacks a discussion section. Is the study of the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth from the perspective of synergy theory the author's original contribution? Has anyone else explored this? What are the general driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth, and what is the contribution of this article?

7. Conclusion. Similar to the abstract, I do not find the research focus of this article. What are the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth? How are they manifested? What are their mechanisms?

8. The reference formatting is incorrect, lacking DOI numbers, and the numbering is inconsistent.

This article adopts a good perspective by studying the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth from the synergy theory perspective. However, the empirical process does not seem to support the author's research hypothesis. I maintain my previous review conclusion and do not recommend this article for publication in Sustainability.

Author Response

To review 1:

1.Thank you once again for the opportunity to review this article. However, I believe there are still some major deficiencies that need to be addressed. The following points outline my concerns:

Response： We hoping that this revision can satisfy your requirements. Thank you.

2.The author aims to explore the driving forces behind the multi-scale spatial structure growth of urban agglomerations, but the abstract only mentions the four stages and four types of urban agglomeration development. I am curious about what the “driving forces” actually are?

Response:  The core thoughts of this paper is synergy effect make the urban expansion become the multiscale spatial structure, rather than sprawling. The changes of development factor fluctuation state (population and GDP in this paper) drive the growth of spatial structure. We proposed four evolution stages of urban agglomeration. The change is one of the growth motivations for urban expansion. In addition, the upgrade of spatial synergistic relationships braces the new fractality and new scale existing in, such as point -to-point spatial synergy. Spatial synergy ensures the urban expansion towards the directions of ordered spatial structure. The upgrade is another growth motivation. Most of import is that the upgrading of spatial synergistic relationship and the state change of development factor fluctuation synergize as growth motivation for urban agglomeration.

This research may be a little different from previous studies. This paper also adopted GDP and populations to manifest the growth of urbanization. But we use synergy theory to emphasize the state of them. And highlighted the importance of spatial synergy during the growth process. Then elucidate the synergy effect of the changes of state and the upgrade of spatial synergy, which is growth motivation for urban agglomeration.

Hoping those explains could make you more accuracy understanding this article. We are sorry for this inconvenience.

3.In the introduction, the author discusses the main areas, methods, and data of urban agglomeration research. However, how does this relate to the keyword "driving forces"? Shouldn't the author focus on organizing the text around the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth?

Response:  We reorganized the introduction, and added 2. Research progress of urban agglomeration in which we analyzed the previous studies of growth motivation (“driving force”). Please see line 46-77.

From one of the perspectives of system science, synergy effect is the driving force for the growth of system. This paper organized around the theme of synergy effect.

Thank you.

 

4.Synergy Theory in Urban Agglomeration Systems. Does this section belong to the literature review? I suggest merging it with the introduction. Additionally, I do not find this section to be rich and comprehensive. I would prefer to see the current progress in research on the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth, with synergy theory being only a part of it rather than the entirety.

Response: We have added 2. Research progress of urban agglomeration in which we analyzed the previous studies of growth motivation (“driving force”). Synergy theory really a part of it. Thank you. Please see line 51-77.

 

5. Methodology. The content presented by the author currently does not belong to the research methodology but rather to a general logical reasoning process. I recommend the author focus on synergy theory in this section and construct a theoretical framework for the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth.

Response: This paper adopted case study to develop some new findings. Case study is the method, synergy theory is the theoretical application. Of course, we made a big change in this section, and added some descriptions of synergy effect.  Please see line 122-149. Thank you.

 

6.Unfortunately, in sections four and five, I still do not find a systematic summary of the driving forces of urban agglomeration growth. Formally, the author does not clearly present the “driving forces,” and in terms of content, the author does not provide a comprehensive empirical summary of the “driving forces.” Additionally, the titles of the figures and tables in these sections are confusing, which is problematic for the empirical focus.

Response: Section 4 we developed the multiscale spatial structure and evolution stages of urban agglomeration, which is fundamental to the following researches. In section 5, we described the growth motivation. Fig.6 further explain it. And we tried to make the titles of the figures and tables more understandable. Thank you.

7.The article lacks a discussion section. Is the study of the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth from the perspective of synergy theory the author's original contribution? Has anyone else explored this? What are the general driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth, and what is the contribution of this article?

Response: We have added discussion in the text. This paper using synergy theory is an innovation, but there do have some related researches. We have added some comparison with previous researches, and added the limitations. Section 5.3 presented general driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth. We emphasize the contribution in conclusion and abstract.

Thank you.

Please see line312 -321,380-388,445-466.

8. Conclusion. Similar to the abstract, I do not find the research focus of this article. What are the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth? How are they manifested? What are their mechanisms?

Response: The growth motivations are the changes of state, upgrade of spatial synergy and synergy effect of them, which is the mechanism of growth motivation (Fig.6). Synergy effect motivated the orderly growing of urban agglomeration. We manifested it by the changes of state and upgrade of spatial synergistic relationships. Of course, we have made some revisions in the conclusion. Please see line 523-532.

 

9.The reference formatting is incorrect, lacking DOI numbers, and the numbering is inconsistent.

Response: Reference formatting was corrected, DOI numbers was added, the numbering is consistent. Please check the revision. Thank you.

 

10.This article adopts a good perspective by studying the driving forces behind urban agglomeration growth from the synergy theory perspective. However, the empirical process does not seem to support the author's research hypothesis. I maintain my previous review conclusion and do not recommend this article for publication in Sustainability.

Response: We have further revised the manuscript, hoping the revision could get your appreciations. Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The scientific question is still not explicitly raised in the introduction. Suggest supplementing the research objectives of this article.

2. The article should include an overview of the research area and an introduction to data sources.

3. The discussion section needs to be supplemented in the text. The author should discuss the important findings in the article, respond to scientific problem-solving, compare with similar research, and point out the shortcomings of this study.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

To reviewer 2:

Thank you for your suggestions, please see the point to point response as follows:

1 The scientific question is still not explicitly raised in the introduction. Suggest supplementing the research objectives of this article.

Response：We added the research objectives in the introduction. See line 46-49. Thank you.

2. The article should include an overview of the research area and an introduction to data sources.

Response： We reorganized introduction and added research progress of urban agglomeration. see line50-77. Thank you.

3. The discussion section needs to be supplemented in the text. The author should discuss the important findings in the article, respond to scientific problem-solving, compare with similar research, and point out the shortcomings of this study.

Response: We added more discussion in the text. Please see line line312 -321,380-388,445-466.

The shortcomings were added, see the section 5.4 limitation.

Thank you.

4.Moderate editing of English language is required.

Response: We have resorted to professional editing service. Please see the revision. Thank you.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper can be accept in present form.