Cartographic Resources for Equitable University–Community Interaction in Slum Areas

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper's theme is interesting, but it presents a lot of problems. The use of English has many issues. The section Cartographic products and resources is not useful. The paper does not present any spatial data from the examined case studies. Names presented in the paper are not clear what they mean, e.g. Milton Santos, Vicon SAGA ... The conclusions are poor.  

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

English quality is poor, needs major revisions.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding corrections highlighted in the re-submitted file. All modifications made to the text (including those recommended by other reviewers) are highlighted in red.

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

We added13 new references to improve the theoretical background of the paper (Highlighted in red in the reference topic).

The use of English has many issues. 

The paper underwent review by a native English speaker, resulting in numerous revisions to enhance the writing. 

The section Cartographic products and resources is not useful. 

The session was condensed, and the remaining content deemed relevant for the task was integrated into the previous topic.

The paper does not present any spatial data from the examined case studies. 

We acknowledge that spatial data is a lot valuable. However, due to the paper's length, we prioritized showcasing images depicting the spatial data analysis process of some projects (which also includes maps) rather than the final produced maps. To fulfill this request, we are compiling this information on the Community Mapping Portal (https://sites.google.com/view/portalmapeamentocomunitario/).

Names presented in the paper are not clear what they mean, e.g. Milton Santos, Vicon SAGA (and other comments present in the attached file).

Thank you for such a careful review. We have improved each detail pointed out.
Regarding Milton Santos, we added a footnote.

In line 92, we included the name of the mentioned author.

Sentences from L101 to 109 were rephrased.

In line 151, the dominant cartography was explained as a "mapmaking approach that often reflects the perspectives and interests of those in positions of power or authority."

In line 226, "usually head and head of the family" was revised to "head of the family."

Regarding Viconsaga, footnote 4 was supplemented with information about the platform's key functionalities.

 Footnotes were added about the Geocombate COVID 19 and Mobiliza RAU+E groups.

The conclusions are poor.

We introduced a section for critical analyses and appended two paragraphs to the conclusion.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear/s Author/s,

Re: Manuscript “Cartographic Resources for Equitable University-CommunityInteraction in slum areas”

Reviewer’s report:

The topic of the paper is interesting in order to improve cartographic resources and to provide a better service to the whole population. In the introduction it is not clear what the research gap is. Colonialist and exploitative approaches and to break down the conventions produced by hegemonic cartography are mentioned, but the variables on which these approaches are based are not explained in the theoretical framework. Thus, there is no discussion to compare the old and the new approaches that the authors have researched.

A search in the JCR with the keyword "participatory mapping" yields more than 4,000 results. If the word "collaborative mapping" is added to 359, and "urban development" is also added, another 25 results. The word "social cartography", 1,250 results.

There is little explanation of the qualitative methods used. We do not know whether the participants' answers are biased, nor do we know details such as the date of the study or the number of participants, or how the data provided by the participants was obtained.

I hope that all these indications improve the authors' paper.

Best Regards.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding corrections highlighted in the re-submitted file. All modifications made to the text (including those recommended by other reviewers) are highlighted in red.

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

In the introduction it is not clear what the research gap is. 

We acknowledge the observation and have included a paragraph (L84-91) emphasizing the research gap.

Colonialist and exploitative approaches and to break down the conventions produced by hegemonic cartography are mentioned, but the variables on which these approaches are based are not explained in the theoretical framework. Thus, there is no discussion to compare the old and the new approaches that the authors have researched.

We incorporated this issue into the theoretical framework (L129-138 and L146-149) and discussions (5.1. Critical analysis of the results), significantly enriching the work.

A search in the JCR with the keyword "participatory mapping" yields more than 4,000 results. If the word "collaborative mapping" is added to 359, and "urban development" is also added, another 25 results. The word "social cartography", 1,250 results.

Other references related to these terminologies were cited in a paragraph elucidating the research gap (L84-91)

There is little explanation of the qualitative methods used. 

To enhance clarity, we introduced a flowchart to elucidate the methods used and provide a clearer depiction of the qualitative criteria and categories, which are now more thoroughly described in the text.

We do not know whether the participants' answers are biased, nor do we know details such as the date of the study or the number of participants, or how the data provided by the participants was obtained.

Thank you for flagging this. A limitation of the study, highlighted in the conclusions (L609-616), is the ability to conduct interviews with only one community member (a participant in the Morro do Preventório project, who was also an academic researcher and fieldwork coordinator). Despite all interviewers' active involvement and provision of objective information about the projects and cartographic resources used, we recognize the absence of the perspective of our primary user, the slum resident. Consequently, additional studies, including questionnaires, usability tests, and other methods, have been conducted to capture this crucial input.

We have added information about the dates and numbers of participants in each project.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

L40-43: The following papers are recommended to provide context for urban expansion trends and slum issues within a global framework:

"Evaluating trends, benefits, and risks of global cities in recent urban expansion for advancing sustainable development" in Habitat International…

"Mapping global urban land for the 21st century with data-driven simulations and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways" in Nat. Commun…

Introduction Section: The current introduction section is excessively long. We recommend creating a dedicated literature review section for 1.1 and 1.2. This will provide a more focused and organized overview of the existing research.

Flowchart: It is advisable to incorporate a flowchart to illustrate the stages of your research more clearly. This will help readers understand the logical progression of your work.

Section 3.1-3.5. Clarify the role of these sections in relation to your research goals. Present visible data, forms, or results of activities. Consider using simple figures to depict the main ideas and logical flow of each activity.

Content Alignment: Ensure that the content of your study and analysis aligns with your research design.

L182: Clarify the purpose and significance of conducting the stage 3 analysis.

L185: Address the absence of the Stage 4 analysis.

Discussion Section: Incorporate a discussion section to present critical analyses of the results, critiques, and recommendations derived from the study. Explore the broader implications for addressing education in slum areas or something else.

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding corrections highlighted in the re-submitted file. All modifications made to the text (including those recommended by other reviewers) are highlighted in red.

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors:

Introduction Section: The current introduction section is excessively long. We recommend creating a dedicated literature review section for 1.1 and 1.2. This will provide a more focused and organized overview of the existing research.
We agree, and a Literature Review section was created under the name of "2. Interaction Between Researchers and Communities through Mapping." Following another reviewer's suggestion, we reduced the content of the topic entitled “2.2. Cartographic Products and Resources Cartographic products” and removed this title.

L40-43: The following papers are recommended to provide context for urban expansion trends and slum issues within a global framework: - "Evaluating trends, benefits, and risks of global cities in recent urban expansion for advancing sustainable development" in Habitat International… - "Mapping global urban land for the 21st century with data-driven simulations and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways" in Nat. Commun…

The paper by Zhong et al. in Habitat International seems very interesting. I am curious to see the results they achieved in comparing urban expansion, GDP, and population growth. Unfortunately, the paper is not open access and is not available in my country's repository.
Gao and O'Neill's paper is also very interesting and was used to enrich the information presented in the first paragraph.

Flowchart: It is advisable to incorporate a flowchart to illustrate the stages of your research more clearly. This will help readers understand the logical progression of your work.

Thank you for this suggestion. We incorporated a flowchart to better explain the methods used. It definitely enhanced the clarity of the work. The text was also reviewed to address this same issue.

L182: Clarify the purpose and significance of conducting the stage 3 analysis.

L211-218, the purpose and significance of stage 3 were better explained

L185: Address the absence of the Stage 4 analysis. 

A new topic on analysis was added - 5.1. Critical analysis of the results.

Section 3.1-3.5. Clarify the role of these sections in relation to your research goals.

L223-227 was added to clarify the role of these sections in relation to your research goals.

Present visible data, forms, or results of activities. Consider using simple figures to depict the main ideas and logical flow of each activity.

We agree that all this information is valuable, but due to the paper extension, we prioritized presenting short presentations of each project and a more detailed joint analysis of them all. To address this request, we will be gathering this information in the Community Mapping Portal (https://sites.google.com/view/portalmapeamentocomunitario/) and reference it in the paper (footnote 2).

Content Alignment: Ensure that the content of your study and analysis aligns with your research design.

We believe the flowchart and adjustments to the methodology topic (in red) made content alignment clearer.

Discussion Section: Incorporate a discussion section to present critical analyses of the results, critiques, and recommendations derived from the study. Explore the broader implications for addressing education in slum areas or something else.

A discussion session was incorporated

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have made significant changes, and the paper is improved. I believe it can be published in its current form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate the significant contributions that greatly aided in improving the quality of the produced article.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear/s Author/s,

Re: Manuscript “Cartographic Resources for Equitable University-CommunityInteraction in slum areas”

Reviewer’s report:

It is appreciated that the authors have worked hard to improve the paper. However, the discussion lacks the necessary link between the theoretical framework and the results obtained and seems to be a summary of the latter, without clearly showing the authors' contribution to their work.

Best Regards.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your constructive feedback on our manuscript. We have carefully considered your suggestions and made revisions accordingly. We acknowledge the importance of establishing a clear link between the theoretical framework and to add results based on authors experiences at the projects. In response to your comments, we have revised section 5.1, and the modified text is highlighted in blue for easy identification.

Thank you once again for your valuable input.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I've observed that some of my earlier comments were not adequately addressed.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We want to express our appreciation for your earlier suggestions, which we have carefully considered and endeavored to address. We regret any oversight in fully incorporating your previous comments.

We have revisited your feedback and made further revisions on the discussion session (5.1), highlighted in blue. We are committed to improving the quality of our work and value your input in this process.

Thank you once again for your time and dedication to enhancing the quality of our manuscript.

Best regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf