Network Structure Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Urban Agglomerations in China under Impact of COVID-19

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines how the impact of the COVID-19 on the network structure of China’s urban agglomerations (UAs) by considering a number of factors. The analysis is carried out in three phases and the quantitative analysis of patterns is carried out in as a modelling methodology.  

This is an interesting study that considers a three-level classification of the UAs as well as several factors as potential influencing aspects. The aim of the study is presented in section 1, together with the relevant literature. The methodology is clearly described, the results are properly interpreted and support the overall discussion and the conclusions.

Please note the following:

Section 2.1. Delete the first 3 paragraphs as they are from the author’s template.

Line 255, explain the “percentage of city a”.

Line 255-256, “𝐷𝑎𝑏,𝑜𝑢𝑡 is the migration intensity of city a to city b on the same day, and 𝑑𝑎𝑏,𝑜𝑢𝑡 is the percentage of city a to city b on the  same day”, the explanation is the same as line 254-255.  The same with lines 282-285.

Line 266-267, when you talk about “elements” do you mean the links?

Line 303, “difference between nodes' ties in the network is smaller”, meaning unclear.

In Figures 2 and 4, introduce the term “assortativity”, but there is no reference to it in the text.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The subject matter of the manuscript is intriguing and addresses crucial issues concerning the operation and evolution of urban agglomerations amidst the circumstances preceding, during, and post the Covid-19 pandemic. The article is accurately composed. However, I propose enhancing the significance of the conducted research not solely within the scope of the studied area or region. My suggestion is for the authors to exert further effort in delineating the essence of the research, also from a global standpoint. Another aspect pertains to internationalization. I kindly request to include the situational descriptions involving examples from other countries, considering their geographical, economic, social, and spatial disparities. Moreover, it is advisable to augment the discourse with examples from existing literature, encompassing foreign studies, rather than primarily relying on domestic citations.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript proposes an interesting social network analysis of the network structure of Urban agglomerations under pandemic circumstances.

The study is well-organized and the subject fits with the journal’s topics.

However, the manuscript presents several major criticalities that need to be addressed before it can be considered for publication.

First, the introduction section is too lengthy misleading the reader in catching the contents of the research, its scientific relevance, as well as how it can contribute to augment knowledge in the field of the selected MDPI topic: “Sustainable Development and Coordinated Governance of Urban and Rural Areas under the Guidance of Ecological Wisdom”.

The first part of section 2 contains a part of the journal’s “instruction for authors” (lines 170-184).

Moreover, the research methodology described in this section should be supported/justified in a scientifically sound manner.

In section 3, numerous typos can be found and data presentation is unclear (e.g. XGDP

In Table 2).

The discussion of the methodological implications of the research needs to be elaborated more.

The language quality is indeed poor and numerous typos can be found.

Based on the above considerations, the manuscript should be rejected since its overall scientific quality is not adequate, encouraging the Authors to resubmit it after an augmentation of all the sections.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In the text numerous typos can be found. Language improvement and text proofreading is needed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The Authors have sufficiently improved the quality of the manuscript.

Hence, it can be considered for publication.