Building a Cadastral Map of Europe through the INSPIRE and Other Related Initiatives
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I thank the authors for their paper. However, the content of the study needs to be improved. It would be easier to understand the outputs of the countries according to the INSPIRE data theme if they were presented in a table format. The article is written more in the format of a review article. Although the study results are discussed, each country should be evaluated separately to show their compliance and deficiencies. (In the discussion section, suggestions can be provided for improvement by presenting a table showing successes and deficiencies).
In the conclusion section, there is no suggested method proposed by the authors based on the research findings. The study only presents the current situation. What contribution or suggestions do the authors have for improving this situation? (The suggestions provided are insufficient). Overall, the study needs to be reconsidered and rewritten.
In this context, the study is not suitable for publication in the journal.
Minor grammatical errors should be noted.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions which we have accepted and used in a new version of article which has been reconsidered and rewritten.
We extended introduction by providing more arguments to research question and by adding new research methodology subsection. We believe that our approach is innovative by investigating different initiatives regarding cadastral data from legal, social and technical perspective. We focused mainly on the EU level and investigate the individual countries through the INSPIRE Geoportal. The reasons for different situations regarding cadastral data in individual countries could be an excellent subject for the future research that would need more detailed research and reasoning on the country level. The combination of the current research findings provides clear picture of current status regarding availability and accessibility of cadastral data in the EU. Thus, providing a solid base for improvements and future research.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our research findings will nicely complement existing research and bring added value for future research.
We added more explanation for tables and figures including for individual countries.
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation. It includes: legal and policy framework, sharing models of data governance, data integration and interoperability, quality assurance and data updating, stakeholder engagement, user needs and applications.
Reviewer 2 Report
General comments:
The manuscript is entitled " Building a Cadastral Map of Europe through the INSPIRE and other related initiatives”. There are some issues with this manuscript, mainly related to the readability and composition of the manuscript.
Specific comments:
Point 1: line 119 and Line 122; Figure 1 and Figure 2 seem to copy and paste and it is a picture so write in Word format.
Point 2: Line 201; Move Table 1 to the annexe section.
Point 3: Write some recommendations separately to policymakers and implementers as a new subsection after the conclusion.
Point 4: You used only 29 references so; it is very small for the article and I suggest that add citations to the introduction and discussion sections.
Questions:
1. What are the contributions of your research?
2. How does it improve our overall understanding of the subject material?
3. What future directions in research are suggested from your findings and conclusions?
4. How does your research complement and support the key hypotheses from the published literature on this subject?
Needs minor editing for the English language.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions which we mostly accepted and used in a new version of article which has been rewritten.
We extended introduction by providing more arguments to research question and by adding new research methodology subsection. We believe that our approach is innovative by investigating different initiatives regarding cadastral data from legal, social and technical perspective.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our research findings will nicely complement existing research and bring added value for future research.
We added more explanation for tables and figures including for individual countries.
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation. It includes: legal and policy framework, sharing models of data governance, data integration and interoperability, quality assurance and data updating, stakeholder engagement, user needs and applications.
Specific comments and questions:
Point 1: line 119 and Line 122; Figure 1 and Figure 2 seem to copy and paste and it is a picture so write in Word format.
The figures are originals used in previous articles and JRC reports. The separate image files have better quality.
Point 2: Line 201; Move Table 1 to the annexe section.
In our opinion, if we remove the table from this part of the article, it will be difficult to interpret the images, and it will impair the continuity of the work.
Point 3: Write some recommendations separately to policymakers and implementers as a new subsection after the conclusion.
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation.
Point 4: You used only 29 references so; it is very small for the article and I suggest that add citations to the introduction and discussion sections.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain
Questions:
- What are the contributions of your research?
Contributions are provided in conclusion section based on the results. By investigating current situation on the EU level through different initiatives we assessed current situation of the cadastral data regarding their availability and accessibility.
- How does it improve our overall understanding of the subject material?
The research findings provide solid base for understanding and improvement of current situation.
- What future directions in research are suggested from your findings and conclusions?
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation. It includes: legal and policy framework, sharing models of data governance, data integration and interoperability, quality assurance and data updating, stakeholder engagement, user needs and applications.
- How does your research complement and support the key hypotheses from the published literature on this subject?
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our findings will complement existing research and bring added value for future research.
Reviewer 3 Report
The article is of an overview nature. It describes the current state of implementation of cadastral data at European SDI level. If the authors wish to publish this review as an original research paper, they must complete the article with a materials and methods section and justify the methodology. There is a lack of references to scientific articles on similar topics. What is innovative about the research presented to me for evaluation?
1. What is the main question addressed by the research?
What is the research methodology and its reasoning? What is innovative about the research conducted?
2. Do you consider the topic original or relevant in the field, and if so, why?
I think that the topic addressed is important and necessary. The availability of open cadastral data at continental level is needed by, among others, geographers for detailed spatial analyses.
3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
This is what the author aims to prove in the paper through sound research. What is missing in the work is a reference to cadastral studies based on cadastral data at European continental level.
4. What specific improvements could the authors consider regarding the methodology?
Simply describe the accepted research logic. Why exactly is this logic?
5. Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and do they address the main question posed?
Yes, the conclusions are based on the results, which, unfortunately, is not sufficiently justified.
6. Are the references appropriate?
No references to scientific studies that use cadastral data in Europe. The scientific argument is mainly based on industry reports and legislation.
7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures.
The figures and tables included in the article are needed. At a basic level, they visualise and collate statistical data.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions which we have accepted and used in a new version of article which has been reconsidered and rewritten.
We extended introduction by providing more arguments to research question and by adding new research methodology subsection.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our research findings will complement existing research and bring added value for the future research.
We added more explanation for tables and figures including for individual countries.
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation. It includes: legal and policy framework, sharing models of data governance, data integration and interoperability, quality assurance and data updating, stakeholder engagement, user needs and applications.
Questions
- What is the main question addressed by the research?
What is the research methodology and its reasoning? What is innovative about the research conducted?
We have added research methodology subsection. We believe that our approach is innovative by investigating different initiatives regarding cadastral data from legal, social and technical perspective. The combination of research findings provides clear picture of current status regarding availability and accessibility of cadastral data in the EU.
- Do you consider the topic original or relevant in the field, and if so, why?
I think that the topic addressed is important and necessary. The availability of open cadastral data at continental level is needed by, among others, geographers for detailed spatial analyses.
Thank you for your comment. We fully agree with that.
- What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
This is what the author aims to prove in the paper through sound research. What is missing in the work is a reference to cadastral studies based on cadastral data at European continental level.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our findings will complement existing research and bring added value for future research.
- What specific improvements could the authors consider regarding the methodology?
Simply describe the accepted research logic. Why exactly is this logic?
We have added research methodology subsection. We tried to observe and investigate situation from different points of view, namely legal, social and technical.
- Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented and do they address the main question posed?
Yes, the conclusions are based on the results, which, unfortunately, is not sufficiently justified.
We have extended conclusions and added research methodology for improving the situation.
- Are the references appropriate?
No references to scientific studies that use cadastral data in Europe. The scientific argument is mainly based on industry reports and legislation.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain
- Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures.
The figures and tables included in the article are needed. At a basic level, they visualise and collate statistical data.
We added more explanation for tables and figures.
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper discusses the current status effort to provide a consistent access to the cadastral data belonging to the member states of the EEU and EFTA.
The content should make the paper interesting to readers in member states, but also to people working on Cadastre in non-European jurisdictions, who in many cases will be addressing the same issues.
Note:
One important use for cadastral data is as a default "base map" (with "map" being taken in its most general sense). Often the cadastral boundaries are used to help locate other features such as street furniture, underground cables, etc.
Some presentation issues:
Table 1:
Use of DSi1.2 ... NSi2.2 at table headings makes this table hard to interpret.
Figure 4: The colours are hard to interpret - they are very similar e.g. IT and LU, De and NO, etc. Can some fonting be used?
Figure 6. Readers would find this easier if NSi2.1 and 2 were replaced or explained in this caption.
Line 45: very long paragraph - can it be split?
Line 92: A new paragraph would help here
Line 123: MS and EFTA should be explained. Readers will probably know EU.
Line 376: "preventing to capitalise on" (bad phrase)
Lines 380-383 Badly structured sentence.
Line 461: Badly structured sentence.
Line 494: s,standard...
Line 523 and other lines "sharmonising" is not a word.
Lines 532 to 535: sentence structure could be improved.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions which we have accepted and used in a new version of article which has been rewritten.
We extended introduction by providing more arguments to research question and by adding new research methodology subsection.
We have extended the literature review in the introduction and referred to the current global initiatives in the domain. We believe that our research findings will complement existing research and bring added value for the future research.
We added more explanation for tables and figures including for individual countries.
The conclusion section is extended with future research methodology for improving the situation. It includes: legal and policy framework, sharing models of data governance, data integration and interoperability, quality assurance and data updating, stakeholder engagement, user needs and applications.
Some presentation issues:
Table 1:
Use of DSi1.2 ... NSi2.2 at table headings makes this table hard to interpret.
The paragraph before the table contains an explanation for each indicator
Figure 4: The colours are hard to interpret - they are very similar e.g. IT and LU, De and NO, etc. Can some fonting be used?
Accepted and corrected
Figure 6. Readers would find this easier if NSi2.1 and 2 were replaced or explained in this caption.
Accepted and more explanation provided in the text
Line 45: very long paragraph - can it be split?
Done. The introduction has been rewritten.
Line 92: A new paragraph would help here
Done
Line 123: MS and EFTA should be explained. Readers will probably know EU.
Corrected
Line 376: "preventing to capitalise on" (bad phrase)
Corrected
Lines 380-383 Badly structured sentence.
Corrected
Line 461: Badly structured sentence.
Corrected
Line 494: s,standard...
Corrected
Line 523 and other lines "sharmonising" is not a word.
Corrected
Lines 532 to 535: sentence structure could be improved.
Corrected
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for your article, but there are some shortcomings.
1. Your literature review is insufficient. Although many internet resources are used in the citations, the articles on cadastre (in LADM and other international standards) have not been taken into account sufficiently.
For example;
Bydłosz, J. 2013. Towards LADM country cadastral profile — Case Poland. 5th Land Administration Domain Model Workshop. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 24–25 September 2013.
Lemmen, C., Van Oosterom, P. and Bennett, R. 2015. The land administration domain model. Land Use Policy, 49, 535–45. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.014
Alkan M., Z.A. Polat, 2017, Design and Development of LADM-based infrastructure for Turkey, Survey Review, 49, Issuu 356
ALSO up to date LAND cadastre paper should be investigated.
2. Methodology should be a separate section (2nd) and should be supported by a figure.
The main aim of this research is to investigate if it is possible to create a cadastral map of Europe. And if so, how?
You should explain the main element of the work summarized in the above sentence more clearly and support it with a figure.
In addition, you should also give your clear solution suggestions, Conclusions and Suggestions, which support the well-explained chapters (Cadastral parcels in INSPIRE and Other related initiatives in Europe) and discussions that I have mentioned below in the study (Suggestions should definitely be added, or a separate section). This is extremely important to add original value to the work.
3. Cadastral parcels in INSPIRE and Other related initiatives in Europe sections are explained with beautiful illustrations within the scope of the article title and content.
4. The word this is used a lot at the beginning of the sentences one after the other, especially in the conclusion part, and this is not desired in academic writing.
I have made some English corrections in the attached file as an example for you. Please pay attention to the article corrections.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions which we have mostly accepted and used in a new version of article
- Your literature review is insufficient. Although many internet resources are used in the citations, the articles on cadastre (in LADM and other international standards) have not been taken into account sufficiently.
For example;
Bydłosz, J. 2013. Towards LADM country cadastral profile — Case Poland. 5th Land Administration Domain Model Workshop. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 24–25 September 2013.
Lemmen, C., Van Oosterom, P. and Bennett, R. 2015. The land administration domain model. Land Use Policy, 49, 535–45. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.01.014
Alkan M., Z.A. Polat, 2017, Design and Development of LADM-based infrastructure for Turkey, Survey Review, 49, Issuu 356
ALSO up to date LAND cadastre paper should be investigated.
We thank the reviewer for this comment. We have added the key literature on LADM, although LADM is not the focus of our research. However, we agree that the inclusion of key research papers and review papers where LAS development trends are presented are an added value of the paper (see the second paragraph in the introduction). However, we have avoided the country-specific papers as this has not been the focus of the research.
- Methodology should be a separate section (2nd) and should be supported by a figure.
We thank the reviewer for this comment. We have added the figure to the 1.2. Methodology. In our opinion it fits better to keep methodology in the Introduction to preserve reading fluency.
The main aim of this research is to investigate if it is possible to create a cadastral map of Europe. And if so, how?
You should explain the main element of the work summarized in the above sentence more clearly and support it with a figure.
In addition, you should also give your clear solution suggestions, Conclusions and Suggestions, which support the well-explained chapters (Cadastral parcels in INSPIRE and Other related initiatives in Europe) and discussions that I have mentioned below in the study (Suggestions should definitely be added, or a separate section). This is extremely important to add original value to the work.
Thank you. We have added some more content in the introduction and in the conclusion. We think that it is not necessary to additional figure since we added methodology an already figures 3 and 7 clearly reflect the current situation.
- Cadastral parcels in INSPIRE and Other related initiatives in Europe sections are explained with beautiful illustrations within the scope of the article title and content.
Thank you for the comment
- The word this is used a lot at the beginning of the sentences one after the other, especially in the conclusion part, and this is not desired in academic writing.
Thank you for the comment. We have corrected the issue with the word “this” and we have also checked English spelling and grammar.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article gained significantly in value after the revision. The authors have responded positively to all my comments. I recommend the article for publication.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you
Best regards
