Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Coupling Coordination Degree between Haze Disaster and Urbanization Systems in China from 2000 to 2020
, Zhanzhong Tang 2,*, Litao Wang 3, Wenliang Liu 3, Eshetu Shifaw 4, Weiwei Zhang 1 and Bing Guo 5
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study is attempt to evaluate the coupling coordination level between regional haze-fog disaster risk and urbanization development level in mainland China. The topic is important but less novelties can be found in the method of this study. The introduction descried in the abstract could be more concise, and more concentrated discussions should be provided. Moreover, try to link the coupling coordination level to regional sustainable development goals mentioned in the abstract. Some detailed suggestions are listed as follows:
Line 35: “while that of central and western provinces had a lower one.” Is it only one coordination degree for all central and western provinces?
Line 36: The keyword of “China” should be placed at the last keyword.
Line 104: A “,” is needed after “Initially”.
Line 135: Normally, the Hainan Province is classified into mainland China.
Line 137: The province names should be provided in the figure 1.
Line 142: The details of MODIS dataset source and spatial data interpretation should be provided.
Line 143-145: The relevant references are suggested to provided.
Line 155: The term of “haze-fog” includes vapours and aerosols?
Line 161: The relevant references are suggested to provided.
Line 167-168: The “i”? Besides, the relevant references for existing studies are suggested to be provided to support the four attributes of indicators.
Line 239: The relevant references of existing studies are suggested to provided.
Line 364: In the section of “Discussion”, more discussion should focus on the differences between peer similar studies and this study, highlighting the novelty of the method (e.g. improved coupling coordination model) and results of this study (e.g. differences between this study and peer studies). Besides, the limitations of this provincial case study should be mentioned. The shortcomings mentioned in the conclusion are general and are not focusing on the results of this study.
Line 402: Whether the collinearities of independent variables are considered?
Author Response
Dear Professor,
We are pleased to receive your important and constructive revision comments about the revised manuscript (Title: Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Coupling Coordination Degree between Haze Disaster and Urbanization Systems in China from 2000 to 2020, Manuscript ID: systems-1891437).
We revised the manuscript as your comments and suggestions. All changes to the manuscript have been displayed with “Track Changes” function in the revised submission. We hope after this round of revision, the quality of the revised manuscript will be eligible for publication.
We have read your comments carefully and revised the manuscript according to your comments point to point. Our point-by-point response to the reviewer’s comments was uploaded as a Word file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have provided a temporal and spatial analysis of haze risk index and urbanization index in provinces of China from 2000 to 2020. The results are expected from what the reality is: high in coastal provinces, low in western provinces. The theoretical development based on entropy approach is new. It would be better if the authors can compare the results with their proposed entropy method and those from other methods. The coupling degree between the indices is in fact a correlation coefficient..
Overall, the analysis is solid but policy recommendation in discussion or conclusion is lacking. I recommend the manuscript is accepted for publication with minor revision to address the issues above.
Some other minor comments
(1) Line 59: "spatiotemporl" should be "spatiotemporal"
(2) Line 167: "but also i economic," should be "but also economic,"
(3) Line 227: "distance perspective". What is distance perspective ?
(4) Line 260: "entereda relatively" should be "entered a relatively"
Author Response
Dear Professor,
We are pleased to receive your important and constructive revision comments about the revised manuscript (Title: Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Coupling Coordination Degree between Haze Disaster and Urbanization Systems in China from 2000 to 2020, Manuscript ID: systems-1891437).
We revised the manuscript as your comments and suggestions. All changes to the manuscript have been displayed with “Track Changes” function in the revised submission. We hope after this round of revision, the quality of the revised manuscript will be eligible for publication.
We have read your comments carefully and revised the manuscript according to your comments point to point. Our point-by-point response to the reviewer’s comments was uploaded as a Word file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have well addressed the reviewers' comments and the manuscript is acceptable now.
