Geographical Information System Based Spatial and Statistical Analysis of the Green Areas in the Cities of Abha and Bisha for Environmental Sustainability
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the work"Geographical Information System Based Spatial and statistical 2 Analysis of the Green Areas in the Cities of Abha and Bisha for 3 Environmental Sustainability", Authors compares the environmental sustainability of two cities in Saudi Arabia, Abha, and Bisha, through their green spaces, by analyzing green spaces in both cities.
The manuscript is well written and structured, anyway some chenges have to be performed in order to ongoing with the pubblication. If Authors will follow the suggestion given, I will certainly recommand this article for the pubblication.
Firstly, in the introduction section you speak about the preservation of enrivonment, focused on antropic point of view, on satistaction from a sociology point of view. I suggest you to consider more the importance of quality of enrironment in term of preservation of biodiversity. It's worth to note that a good quality of life pass with good quality of living in harmonic equilibrium with the enrironment. This aspect is also fundamental in prevention of animal health and problems connected with an excessive contact human/animals (in particular for zoonoses).
Moreover, the preservation of environment and a good mitigation between human activities and wildlife is a crucial aspect for a better coexistence. See this article for example: https://doi.org/10.1068/a39261.
Finally, I advice you to think about an other important aspect, that is to say the reduction of hight temperatures in green city in opposite with others that not follow this approach. See the following suggestion:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15092348 - https://doi.org/10.3390/land10080799 - https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00203Finally, I also suggest you to improve the conclusions also giving some future perspectives linked with the present work.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1
In the work "Geographical Information System Based Spatial and statistical Analysis of the Green Areas in the Cities of Abha and Bisha for Environmental Sustainability", Authors compares the environmental sustainability of two cities in Saudi Arabia, Abha , and Bisha through their green spaces, by analyzing green spaces in both cities
However, the manuscript requires responding the following remarks.
- Adding in introduction section part regarding the preservation biodiversity.
Response: Thanks. Introduction has been improved as required.
- Explain the effect of reduction in high temperature on green cities.
Response: Thanks. Part of effect of reduction temperature degree with their effect on green cities has been added.
- Improve the conclusion by adding future perspective linked to this work.
Response: Thanks. Conclusion part have been improved.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author,
Your idea, applying spatial statistics to green areas, to analyse it sustainability, looks a promising idea. Although, for me, your idea is not enough clearly explain in the manuscript, in it present form. First, I missed a theoretical framework. The proposed procedure/method also was difficult to capture, mainly the spatial statistical analysis was not explained and the questionnaire not described). Results chapter is quite confuse, and needs to be revised; for example, the description of results, i.e. the text, does not agree, in some cases, with the tables).
I hope this comments could help you to revise your manuscript successfully.
Regards,
Jacinta Fernandes
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2
- The introduction section should include some latest discussion on spatial statistical analysis
Response: Thanks. The introduction of scientific article has been re described and part of missing detail being added as required.
- Describe about the questionnaire used in this work to reach to a conclusion.
Response: Thanks, All steps that have been made are discussed regarding the questionnaire including the data collection, sampling sizes and analysis the results that have been achieved.
- Result found not match with the table.
Response: Thanks. Results has been revised as required.
Reviewer 3 Report
I have reviewed with great interest the manuscript entitled, “Geographical Information System Based Spatial and statistical Analysis of the Green Areas in the Cities of Abha and Bisha for Environmental Sustainability”. I believe that the topic of this manuscript is relevant to ISPRS IJGI. The manuscript needs enhancement in terms of deficiencies mentioned in the following comments:
1. Introduction: The need for writing this article (and this time) needs to be elaborated. Please include in detail, why is this paper opportune / necessary now; who are you serving with this paper; how does it relate to other problems in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and world.
1.1. It is better to move Study Area (subsection 1.1) under Materials and Methods (Section 2)
1.2. Source of Figure 1 is not mentioned.
2. It is suggested and necessary also to add new section ‘Theoretical Framework’ before ‘Materials and Methods’.
2.1. Under new section ‘Theoretical Framework’, introduce the concept of green areas, environmental sustainability and their relationship. This should be based on theoretical and conceptual insights from literature.
3. Materials and Methods (Section 2)
3.1. Line 111-112. A geo-database was created ----------------- feature classes that included information on different features of the city.
3.2. Type of geodatabase created is not mentioned. Please mention it was Personal, File or Enterprise geodatabase?
3.3. Similarly, type of feature class created and coordinate system used is not mentioned?
3.4. Which spatial reference was used to create geo-database?
3.5. It is important to mention that information about which features of the city were included?
4. Data Collection (Subsection 2.1) is significantly short.
4.1. Statement (Line 124-126), “ The first phase involved collecting data on various fundamental networks and services in Abha and Bisha cities, including maps, 125 layouts, quantitative data, and annual reports from different organizations”. Readers would like to know more details such as names of network and type of services. Please include the details.
4.2. Similarly, it is stated that data were collected ‘from different organizations’. However, it is not clear that which data was collected from which organization (name of organization); and relevance/importance of the data for doing this research. Please include the details.
4.3. The statement, “The second phase focused on the collection of data related to environmental sustainability through field inspection, self-observation, and historical study to assess the resilience level of the two cities” is bit confusing. It is not clear who did field inspection? If the author(s) did it then ‘self-observation’ is redundant. Please clarify it.
4.4. The statement, “Finally, in the third phase, a comparative study was conducted to evaluate the environmental sustainability of the two cities based on the data collected and analyzed in the first two phases”. Better to include, which collected data was used to evaluate which aspect of the environmental sustainability?
5. Assumption and Concern (2.2): The statement, “There are several hypotheses in this study” is misleading as only three hypotheses are in the study. Please correct accordingly.
5.1. Also the three hypotheses are not well developed/framed.
6. Discussion: Please mention, are the results different from other publications?
6.1. Conclusion: What is the answer to the key question as mentioned in the abstract, “This study compares the environmental sustainability of two cities in Saudi Arabia, Abha, and Bisha, through their green spaces, by analyzing green spaces in both cities”. Which city is environmental more sustainable?
7. Please add recommedations for further resaerch (what should be further researched).
My overall recommendation is Major Revision
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Moderate editing required
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3
I have reviewed with great interest the manuscript entitled, “Geographical Information System Based Spatial and statistical Analysis of the Green Areas in the Cities of Abha and Bisha for Environmental Sustainability”. I believe that the topic of this manuscript is relevant to ISPRS IJGI. The manuscript needs enhancement in terms of deficiencies mentioned in the following comments:
- Introduction: The need for writing this article (and this time) needs to be elaborated. Please include in detail, why is this paper opportune / necessary now; who are you serving with this paper; how does it relate to other problems in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and world.
Response: Thanks. The introduction part has been added and modified by adding various directives as required to spot-light the main objectives of the scientific article.
1.1 It is better to move Study Area (subsection 1.1) under Materials and Methods (Section 2)
Response: Thanks. The study area (subsection 1.1) has been moved under Materials and Methods (Section 2).
1.2. Source of Figure 1 is not mentioned.
Response: Thanks. sources: Saudi Geospatial Survey Authority. It has been added.
- Materials and Methods (Section 2)
3.1 Line 111-112. A geo-database was created ----------------- feature classes that included information on different features of the city.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
3.2. Type of geodatabase created is not mentioned. Please mention it was Personal, File or Enterprise geodatabase?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
3.3. Similarly, type of feature class created and coordinate system used is not mentioned?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
3.4. Which spatial reference was used to create geo-database?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
3.5. It is important to mention that information about which features of the city were included?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
- Data Collection (Subsection 2.1) is significantly short.
4.1. Statement (Line 124-126), “ The first phase involved collecting data on various fundamental networks and services in Abha and Bisha cities, including maps, 125 layouts, quantitative data, and annual reports from different organizations”. Readers would like to know more details such as names of network and type of services. Please include the details.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
4.2. Similarly, it is stated that data were collected ‘from different organizations’. However, it is not clear that which data was collected from which organization (name of organization); and relevance/importance of the data for doing this research. Please include the details.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
4.3. The statement, “The second phase focused on the collection of data related to environmental sustainability through field inspection, self-observation, and historical study to assess the resilience level of the two cities” is bit confusing. It is not clear who did field inspection? If the author(s) did it then ‘self-observation’ is redundant. Please clarify it.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
4.4. The statement, “Finally, in the third phase, a comparative study was conducted to evaluate the environmental sustainability of the two cities based on the data collected and analyzed in the first two phases”. Better to include, which collected data was used to evaluate which aspect of the environmental sustainability?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
- Assumption and Concern (2.2): The statement, “There are several hypotheses in this study” is misleading as only three hypotheses are in the study. Please correct accordingly.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
5.1. Also the three hypotheses are not well developed/framed.
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
- Discussion:Please mention, are the results different from other publications?
6.1. Conclusion: What is the answer to the key question as mentioned in the abstract, “This study compares the environmental sustainability of two cities in Saudi Arabia, Abha, and Bisha, through their green spaces, by analyzing green spaces in both cities”. Which city is environmental more sustainable?
Response: Thanks, Request have been added.
Finally, author shall proof-read the paper to improve the quality of the language,
Response: Thanks. The author always strives to produce grammatically correct and coherent sentences. What was requested has been done. I am fully prepared if you find any other notes.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author,
The lack of a theoretical background to support your idea/approach to green space continues to exist in the paper. By theoretical background I do not mean to justify the importance of green spaces to sustainability (by the way, there is no references on this new part of the introduction, and there is a huge amount of literature on this specific subject). I feel the need on this introduction of a framework or the fundamentals of the specific spatial analysis indicators you propose, and why or how they express sustainability. May be, it is a question of rearragement of parts of the texts which are disperse by the different chapters, but the paper lacks on fundamentals of it main aspect - the relationship between sustainability and spatial characteristics of urban green spaces.
In the same line, the methods chapter does not present the description of the spatial variables, which are, in part, described on results. Concerning the questionnaire, the new text does not explain the contents of the present questionnaire, and the procedure of data collection and analysis. It is not necessary. in my opinion, to define the importance of questionnaire based research.
Consequently, the results are difficult to understand. There is no previous explanation (in methods)about what means "Environmental sustainability" or "carbon emissions" or "quality of live on the cities" indicators, referred on results. The data from questionnaire are present in a non expected way. There is no information about the reliability of the questionnaire, etc.
The abstract is to much generalist. It try to justify or framework the research, which is supposed to be included in introduction. But it have no information about the results of the present research.
So, my conclusion is that the revision you made does not fulfill the needs to achieve a good quality paper.
J.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
I am writing to express my sincere gratitude for your time and effort in reviewing my manuscript. Your constructive comments and recommendations have been invaluable in helping me improve the quality of my work.
I have carefully considered each of your suggestions and have made the necessary amendments to the manuscript. I believe that these changes have significantly strengthened the arguments presented in the manuscript and have helped to address some of the concerns that were raised.
Here is a point-by-point responses to your comments:
Comments:
The lack of a theoretical background to support your idea/approach to green space continues to exist in the paper. By theoretical background I do not mean to justify the importance of green spaces to sustainability (by the way, there is no references on this new part of the introduction, and there is a huge amount of literature on this specific subject). I feel the need on this introduction of a framework or the fundamentals of the specific spatial analysis indicators you propose, and why or how they express sustainability. May be, it is a question of rearragement of parts of the texts which are disperse by the different chapters, but the paper lacks on fundamentals of it main aspect - the relationship between sustainability and spatial characteristics of urban green spaces
Response:
Thank you very much for your comments. Please take a look at the theoretical background section. The theoretical background has been added as requested. Also, please take a look at the references section. 7 references have been added related to the issues.
Comments:
In the same line, the methods chapter does not present the description of the spatial variables, which are, in part, described on results. Concerning the questionnaire, the new text does not explain the contents of the present questionnaire, and the procedure of data collection and analysis. It is not necessary. in my opinion, to define the importance of questionnaire based research.
Response:
Thank you very much for your comments. Please take a look at the materials and methods section. The missing information have been added as requested.
Comments:
Consequently, the results are difficult to understand. There is no previous explanation (in methods)about what means "Environmental sustainability" or "carbon emissions" or "quality of live on the cities" indicators, referred on results. The data from questionnaire are present in a non expected way. There is no information about the reliability of the questionnaire, etc.
Response:
Thank you very much for your comments. Please take a look at the materials, methods, and results sections. The requests have been re described and part of missing detail being added. Regarding the reliability of questionnaire used in this work to reach to a conclusion, some information have been added to address some of the concerns that were raised.
Comments:
The abstract is to much generalist. It try to justify or framework the research, which is supposed to be included in introduction. But it have no information about the results of the present research.
Response:
Thank you very much for your comments. Please take a look at the abstract section. The results of the present research have been added as requested.
I would be happy to answer any further questions or concerns you may have about the revised manuscript. Thank you again for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Author,
Reviewer 3 Report
My comments/concerns have been adequately addressed.
The manuscript can be accepted, please.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
I really appreciate the time spent by the judge of my manuscript. Your instructions helped me to improve the manuscript.
Sincerely,
Author,
