Urban Green Space Planning Based on Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comment: Remote sensing data and techniques employed need highlighting with better descriptive details to realise the objectives of the study. A flow-charting for this can be a welcome addition on this.
Elaboration: I found mentions of various remote sensing data used for the study, but the specific processes where these data were used looks somewhat unclear and one needs to presume from his/her background knowledge while reading through the manuscript.
In the methodology flow chart (figure 2), there is mention of Remote Sensing and GIS as a general prelude. Whereas, either details of remote sensing steps/data usage should have found mention within the flow-chart or even a supplementary/separate flow-chart on RS/GIS data, techniques used and outcome should be better for easier comprehension.
Comment: Findings are ofcourse in line with expected relationship when compared parameter by parameter for the ecological sources and therefore, uniqueness of the study to arrive at those findings may be elaborated more in the discussions.
Elaboration: My intention with these comments is to look at the study replication aspect. Can the study model be replicated for similar purposes elsewhere? Therefore, the uniqueness and innovation of the study right from choosing the parameters under investigation for urban green space prioritisation with respect to ecosystem services as well as allied parameters needs to be brought out better. This should allow inferences on the possible replication or adaptation of the model of this study. Thus, it can add more value than to look upon the remedies of environmental/ecological adversities of the area as a fallout of the planning and development fallacies.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The subject of Urban Green Space Planning is a very pertinent one, particularly in relation to the emerging urban policies of prescribing one or other of the technologies on available spaces in some cities. This manuscript, however, needs some moderate changes before publication.
Introduction:
Line 37-38, please cite the following article and other related here: https://doi.org/10.3390/w10040435
As the key focus is intended to be on urban green spaces, there needs to be a more detailed analysis in terms of the explanation and evidence base in relation to this potentially symbiotic relationship. The author should study and include the following paper in the revised version:
- Puttinaovarat, S.; Horkaew, P. A Geospatial Platform for Crowdsourcing Green Space Area Management Using GIS and Deep Learning Classification. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2022, 11, 208. https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11030208
- Shahtahmassebi, Amir Reza, et al. "Remote sensing of urban green spaces: A review." Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 57 (2021): 126946.
- Shafique, Muhammad, Xiaowei Luo, and Jian Zuo. "Photovoltaic-green roofs: A review of benefits, limitations, and trends." Solar Energy 202 (2020): 485-497.
In addition, a paragraph is needed to justify how this manuscript presents new knowledge, and how it represents a holistic overview of the most up-to-date background research.
Material and methods:
Why used the ENVI in this research?
Please carefully check equations 2, 5, and 6.
Tables and Figures:
The title of tables and figures needs to be clearer and more descriptive.
Results and Discussion
There should be a discussion section that compares your results with previous studies. Those studies should be global research not only in China.
What is the limitation of this research?
Best,
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article addresses important issues. Urban planning and population growth must respect the principles of sustainable development. The research methods used and the data adopted for analysis are correct.
Comments:
The abstract should be shortened.
Maps and legends are hardly legible.
As a case study, the article describes urban green space planning using Fengdong New City as an example.
Please highlight in conclusions your results and indicate the applicability of the methodology to other areas.
Please expose the possibilities of GIS and Remote Sensing as universal tools for planning and analysis (e.g. urban green space planning).
Minor linguistic and editorial corrections required
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
It is considered that the new version presented by the authors gives an adequate answer to the main questions previously presented.
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for your response to my comments.
Please review your article carefully (e.g. you have lost the equation 1).
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have conducted an extensive GIS and remote sensing study with source data components that indicate the power of spatial analysis. The paper has much potential to be an interesting story on the use of GIS for complex ecological modelling.
Unfortunately, the promise is not realised by a manuscript that needs much re-organisation and re-writing.
The abstract is unreadable and doesn't make sense due to a high reliance on a string of terms that do not make a cogent argument.
The introduction is similarly disorganised and uses words that do not make sense collected together as they are. The introduction needs a full overhaul and reorganisation from the general outline of the research aim and questions, through a very broad outline of the methods used, and a synopsis of the results.
The data section needs to identify the satellite image host.
The methods description needs to be reorganised to go from the 'general' methods of spatial analysis and then the specific methods - including the justification of the GIS methods used from the literature.
As a result of the above changes, it is likely that the results, discussion and conclusion sections would flow well.
Author Response
please check the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In the manuscript, the authors attempt to construct the urban green space network on the example of Fengdong New City. The problem studied in the manuscript is crucial, as the urbanization processes are unsustainable nowadays. Urban green spaces have a major role to mitigate the adverse effects of urbanization, and providing adequate living conditions for the citizens. The results of the research also revealed that nature conservation capacity must be developed to fulfill citizens’ demands which can be done through the optimization of urban green spaces. I agree with the authors ’conclusions as they are adequately supported by their results.
The applied methodology is suitable for answering research questions and also meets the scientific requirements but in some elements, it is not robust enough, especially in the case of the ecological demand intensity.
The structure of the manuscript is logical and the text is easy to read. The quality of the maps and illustrations is average, sometimes they are too small, especially the legends of the maps.
Overall, I think a major revision is needed before acceptance.
Recommendations and notes to the authors:
The ‘Abstract’ is too long, more than 350 words. Remove some of the methodological parts, and please specify the study area. The reader just sees the area(12,56 km2) of ecological sources but doesn’t know where.
The ‘Introduction’ presents the global problem of urbanization and also adds some theoretical and methodological background to the research. What I’m missing here is the aims of the research at the end of this section. (Only Fig. 2. shows the aims of the research.)
There should be a list of the used abbreviations because not everyone is familiar with them. Maybe, after the first occurrence, the authors indicate in parentheses how they will continue to use it (back propagation neural network = BP neural network).
Subsection 3.1 ‘Technical roadmap’ – I recommend to the authors use the landscape barrier expression instead of landscape resistance. The factors that are taken into account (Table 2.) are not always classic ecological barriers, but in most cases they are. (Regardless of the expression the authors use, its strength/grade can still be used.)
I am not fully convinced of the calculation of ecological demand intensity especially the outdoor recreation intensity seems problematic. Using population density to quantify demand for outdoor leisure is a simplistic approach. Age, income, and employment structure of the neighborhoods and behavioral habits should be considered. Maybe, a representative survey of the local population is needed to make reliable calculations for this. Please provide a more robust approach or literature that supports this methodological part.
In the results, the authors use geographical names like Kunming Lake, Wei River, and so on but the reader maybe does not know the Fengdong New City area this deep, maybe a larger map of the study area with the most frequent used geographical names will help to understand the results.
The most interesting part of the article is the identification of ecological corridors.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I would prefer that the journal editors please discuss my concerns with the authors.
Reviewer 2 Report
I accept the answers of the authors and their willingness to adopt my recommendations and suggestions. I think the manuscript is improved from the first version. I recommend to accpet it for publication in its present form.
