Towards Child-Friendly Streetscape in Migrant Workers’ Communities in China: A Social–Ecological Design Framework

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overall assessment 

 

In the manuscript titled Towards child-friendly streetscape in migrant workers’ communities in China: a social-ecological design framework, Qianxi Zhang, Yat Ming Loo, Wu Deng, Weixuan Chen, Xinkai Wang , Mindong Ni and Ling Chen examines. Address the limited outdoor play space and social exclusion of migrant children living in disadvantaged neighbourhoods by designing child-friendly streetscapes.

 

This study provides a systematic review of the child-friendly streetscape from a socio-ecological perspective, providing opportunities for children to maximise the range of activities available on the street through the socio-ecological design framework.

 

Major commends:

The study summarises the discourses related to the themes, but in part lacks a summative evaluation. The authors present their themes with relative clarity, but there are sections that do not explain their value well. The revision needs to be completed by the publication deadline. The structure of the essay is relatively stable, but it would be better if the language could be condensed. The authors present their themes with relative clarity, but there are sections that do not explain their value well. The revision needs to be completed by the publication deadline.

 

Minor commends:

Line 133-152

It is good to see the author's orientated reading of the literature, in this paragraph the author gives examples of scholars who are actively researching the principles of child friendly street design, for example, Lynch,Jan Gehl etc. and provides inspiration and guidance for the design of child-friendly streets, but lacks summary language.

 

Line 280-195

In the Streetzone planning, ergonomic evaluation and criteria can be added to increase accessibility possibilities.

 

Line 296-313

Access to literature on child-friendly activities that develop the physical and psychological dimensions of intelligence and cognition.

 

Line 314-330

Potential Benefits of Early Childhood Exposure to Plants for Themselves and Ecosystems can be complemented.

 

Line332-348

Information on ergonomics for children can be added more convincingly.

 

Line757-768

The summary is relevant to the topic of the essay, but would like to be more relevant to the topic and ideas, not just to the case study.

 

Line769-777

This paragraph could side-step the significance of the topic, and it is suggested that this paragraph be made more concise

 

Fluent in English language

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for the comments about our work. In the revised paper, we have proofread the manuscript and polished the contents based on your feedback. Please refer to the revised paper for detailed revisions. ( Please see the attachment)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study examines the ecological and social dimensions of building child-friendly streetscapes in urban areas where migrant communities are concentrated, presents a design framework based on this analysis, and shares the results of an implementation experiment based on this framework in the Mingdong community in Ningbo province in China.

By combining the theoretical framework with design and implementation, the authors present an example where research and practice are intertwined. In this respect, I must state that I find the study in question worthy of publication.

However, there are some questions that I expect to be answered methodically in the manuscript:

1. The authors state that they conducted a systematic literature review in the study. If so, what is the clearly formulated question of this review? Did the authors prepare a detailed and clear protocol including all the criteria before starting the search? Did they meet all the conditions that distinguish systematic review from traditional literature review?

 

2. Although the study was conducted in a community where 56% of migrants live, it is not clear how migrants are included in the design and implementation processes and how they are affected by the application. Did migrants also attend the community open day held in August 2020? Which groups used the playground more after it was designed? Is there any evidence that this design provides contact and communication between migrant children and locals? If there is no such finding, what could be the reasons for this? The study should be able to answer these questions as well.

Author Response

We sincerely appreciate your positive evaluation of our study. It is encouraging that you evaluated the research worthy of publication. We have refined the manuscript based on your insights to ensure its readiness for publication(Please see the attachment). Thank you again for your constructive review and support.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article is interesting. It presents a detailed adaptation design process, implementation, and post-occupancy evaluation of a public space that meets the social-ecological conditions for migrant children in China. The text is well-written, and the research considers an extensive bibliographic reference. The theme is correctly contextualized and justified, given the reality of the place. However, one point is unclear: how was the design and implementation process carried out during the pandemic? I suggest the authors comment on this subject.

Regarding the text, some corrections are mandatory:

Line 167: what does the word "hukou" mean? Explain.

Line 670: the legend of Figure 12 is inverted.

Reference [51] is not present in the text.

Author Response

We sincerely thank the reviewer for the encouraging comments about our work. We have proofread the manuscript and polished the contents. Please refer to the revised paper for detailed revisions. (Please see the attachment)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Please see my attached review report. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We appreciate your positive feedback on our manuscript. We have revised the manuscript based on your suggestions and concerns to enhance the quality and clarity of our manuscript. Please refer to the revised paper for detailed revisions. (Please see the attachment.)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you for addressing my comments and suggestions thoroughly. This revised version is much improved. I have no further comments.