Changes in the Patterns of Population Distribution and Built-Up Areas of the Rural–Urban Fringe in Post-Socialist Context—A Central European Case Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Review of “Changes in the patterns of population distribution and built-up areas of the rural-urban fringe in post-socialist context – a Central European case study”
Manuscript Land-2570325
In this paper, the authors investigate the phenomenon the growth of local communities located on the rural-urban fringe of metropolitan areas. Using central Europe as a regional focus and drawing on the specific case of Debrecen, Hungary, the authors investigate migration trends and related spatial patterns. Utilizing a novel dataset from the CLCC databases, the authors apply appropriate and sound GIS methods to identify patterns of density and growth over time. They find that during the transition periods from 1980 to 2020, urban sprawl has been less intensive but more concentrated.
This research is a well contribution to the scientific literature on urban sprawl and suburbanization. There is a scant body of literature on the Central European region on this topic, and so this case is especially useful to learn from the experience in Hungary. I recommend publication upon revision based on these recommendations:
Section 2 on suburbanization and urban sprawl should be expanded to acknowledge the comparative literature and global experiences from around the world. In particular, the authors should contextualize the shrinking cities literature that comes from the studies in Germany, Japan, the United States, and other similar regions that face this experience. In doing so, the authors can acknowledge the phenomenon of shrinking cities as a consequence of urban sprawl and reflect on the implications for their case study. The authors should consider consulting:
The work of Ivonne Audirac, including “Shrinking cities: An unfit term for American urban policy?” Cities 75 (May 2018): 12-19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.001
The work of Thomas J. Vicino and Andrea Sarzynski, including “Shrinking Suburbs: Analyzing the Decline of American Suburban Spaces” Sustainability 2019, 11 (19): 5230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195230
Shrinking Cities: A Global Perspective (2014) by Harry W. Richardson and Chang Woon Nam (editors), New York: Routledge.
Finally, I recommend that the authors briefly reflect on the implications of their findings for urban planners and policymakers. What do these findings suggest? What action of might planners and policymakers consider in addressing this issue?
Thank you. I look forward to reading the revised manuscript.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
We would like to thank Reviewer 1 for the useful comments and constructive critical notes based on which we reviewed our manuscript. Responses to the critical notes are the following:
Point 1: Section 2 on suburbanization and urban sprawl should be expanded to acknowledge the comparative literature and global experiences from around the world. In particular, the authors should contextualize the shrinking cities literature that comes from the studies in Germany, Japan, the United States, and other similar regions that face this experience. In doing so, the authors can acknowledge the phenomenon of shrinking cities as a consequence of urban sprawl and reflect on the implications for their case study. The authors should consider consulting:
- The work of Ivonne Audirac, including “Shrinking cities: An unfit term for American urban policy?” Cities 75 (May 2018): 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.05.001
- The work of Thomas J. Vicino and Andrea Sarzynski, including “Shrinking Suburbs: Analyzing the Decline of American Suburban Spaces” Sustainability 2019, 11 (19): 5230. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195230
- Shrinking Cities: A Global Perspective (2014) by Harry W. Richardson and Chang Woon Nam (editors), New York: Routledge.
Response 1: We accept the Reviewer's suggestion about the issues of shrinking cities and reflecting on the introduced literature. In the rows 79–86.
Point 2: Finally, I recommend that the authors briefly reflect on the implications of their findings for urban planners and policymakers. What do these findings suggest? What action of might planners and policymakers consider in addressing this issue?
Response 2:
We absolutely agree with the Reviewer’s opinion. We extend the article with some policy implications and recommendations at the end of the paper. In the rows 559–563.
Reviewer 2 Report
The article presented for review addresses an issue often described and researched which is the change in distribution patterns of population and built-up areas on the outskirts of rural-urban areas using the example of the city of Debrecen (Hungary) in Central Europe.
Overall, the research conducted is well structured and described. The methodology of the research is not objectionable. Thanks to the use of GIS methods and archival data, it was possible to show the course of the studied phenomenon and demonstrate the regularities governing it.
However, the article should still work on the following issues:
1. Selection of the years of the research conducted. Determining the time intervals of the research every 20 years (1980, 2000, 2020) seems too long. Much more conclusions and the capture of regularities would bring an analysis every 10 years.
2 In describing the causes, conditions and effects of the changes in population distribution that have occurred, it is worth noting that suburbanization (the main cause of the changes that have occurred) also took place in Central Europe before 1989 on a much smaller scale along railroads. In addition, as a side thread, one can also mention economic suburbanization, which is related to population suburbanization.
3. The article practically ignores the context of Hungary's accession to the European Union and its impact on the phenomenon under study.
4. In the text and in the figures it would be useful to provide information on the average distance between the center of Debrecen and its borders. This would allow the reader to clearly see when a city is shown on the graph and when a suburban zone is shown. In Figure 1, it would be useful to introduce (provide) units and measures of distance.
5. The narrative on the contribution of the proposed research to the existing state of knowledge on the subject should be strengthened in the article, and the implications and recommendations of the research should be expanded.
In conclusion, the research conducted and the article written on its basis should be considered an interesting voice in the discussion of changes in population distribution in the post-socialist countries of Central Europe. With a little revision, it is suitable for publication.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
We would like to thank Reviewer 2 for the useful comments and constructive critical notes based on which we reviewed our manuscript. Responses to the critical notes are the following:
Point 1: Selection of the years of the research conducted. Determining the time intervals of the research every 20 years (1980, 2000, 2020) seems too long. Much more conclusions and the capture of regularities would bring an analysis every 10 years.
Response 1: We agree with the Reviewer's suggestion that 10-year periods allow for finer temporal resolution to examine the rural-urban fringe phenomenon, changes in population numbers and spatial patterns in built-up areas. When choosing the time frames included in the analysis (1980, 2000, 2020), our decision was primarily influenced by the limitations of spatial data coverage of the study area.
In addition to the availability of spatial data, other aspects were also taken into account during their selection, which are as follows: 1. The spatial databases used shall provide full coverage of the study area. 2. Shall be prepared according to uniform technical guidelines (standards). 3. For the vectorization of the buildings, large-scale topographic maps and remote sensing data (orthophotos, satellite images) with high or super high geometric resolution shall be used. 4. Data consistency.
The first time frame (1980) is represented by topographic maps with a scale of 1:10000. Of the 34 sections covering the plot, 32 were made between 1978 and 1980 and 2 in 1987. In 1990 (between 1988 and 1992) large-scale topographic maps were not prepared at all for the study area. Some archive black and white and/or color aerial photographs (8 pieces) are available from the Digital Aerial Photograph Archive of Lechner Knowledge Center (FÖMI) from this period, but they cover only a fraction of the administrative area of Debrecen and are, therefore, not suitable for analysis. There are also no satellite images of high spatial resolution from these years. In relation to Hungary joining the European Union in 2004, Hungary's Digital Orthophoto Program (MADOP) was launched in 2000, within the framework of which orthophotos of high spatial resolution from the years 2000, 2005, 2007 and 2011 can be downloaded free of charge regarding the study area. This means that we could have vectorized the buildings of the 2010 timeframe from orthophotos from 2011. Since we did not have a suitable spatial database for the 1990 timeframe, and we would like to present the changes of the same time intervals in the paper, we decided to use 20-year timeframes and reject the 2010 timeframe.
The temporal resolution of CLCC land cover databases were given. All timeframes were included in analysing the land cover changes related to urban sprawl.
Point 2: In describing the causes, conditions and effects of the changes in population distribution that have occurred, it is worth noting that suburbanization (the main cause of the changes that have occurred) also took place in Central Europe before 1989 on a much smaller scale along railroads. In addition, as a side thread, one can also mention economic suburbanization, which is related to population suburbanization.
Response 2: We agree with the Reviewer’s comment about the economic suburbanization. In the case of Hungary, this phenomenon is primarily observed along the motorways and railways have less importance from this respect. The economic suburbanization is especially significant in the agglomeration of Budapest. According to the importance of this issue, we referring the economic suburbanization with larger emphasis. In the rows 87–96.
Point 3: The article practically ignores the context of Hungary's accession to the European Union and its impact on the phenomenon under study.
Response 3: Hungary’s accession to the European Union is not mentioned in the text, because this historic event has less impact on the observed tendencies. For instance, foreign direct investments located to the study area even before 2004. Regarding the changes in the built-up areas, the Hungarian family and housing policy is more dominant. The outmigration of the Hungarian citizens towards the EU countries became more significant after the opening of the labour markets of Germany and the UK, however this has minor impact of the migration tendencies of the specific study area.
Point 4: In the text and in the figures it would be useful to provide information on the average distance between the center of Debrecen and its borders. This would allow the reader to clearly see when a city is shown on the graph and when a suburban zone is shown. In Figure 1, it would be useful to introduce (provide) units and measures of distance
Response 4: Figure 1 is the redrawn (coloured) version of the cited original figure made by Stanilov and Sýkora (2014, 271. p., Figure 9.1.). However, the Reviewer’s comment is relevant regarding the consistency of the article, we should try to avoid the major modification of the content of the given figure.
Point 5: The narrative on the contribution of the proposed research to the existing state of knowledge on the subject should be strengthened in the article, and the implications and recommendations of the research should be expanded.
Response 5: We absolutely agree with the Reviewer’s opinion. We extend the article with some policy implications and recommendations at the end of the paper. In the rows 525, 534, 544, 559–563.
