Spatial Configuration and Sustainable Conservation of Ecotourism Resources in the Dabie Mountains, Eastern China, Using an Ecosystem Services Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article addresses the important issue of balancing biodiversity conservation with tourism development, a key challenge for sustainable development in ecologically sensitive regions. The Dabie Mountains, a region with rich biodiversity and cultural heritage, provides a valuable case study.

The inclusion of GIS and remote sensing techniques ensures detailed spatial analysis, adding depth to the study. However, while the InVEST model and other tools are powerful, the study could benefit from ground validation or community input to corroborate model outputs with local realities.

Qualitative results, such as the spatial distribution of habitat quality and potential tourism development areas, are clearly outlined. However,GDP and population density impact on habitat quality or tourism dynamics is limited presented.

The study combines ecological data with cultural elements, such as traditional villages, highlighting the interdependence of natural and human systems. However, historical and anthropological significance of traditional villages importance is not presented.

Ecosystem services with tourism planning are linked and use to strengthen the argument for sustainable development and ecological conservation. However, a discussion on their applicability to other regions facing similar challenges section will improve the article.

The study will benefit from a section in discussion on the long-term impacts of tourism development on ecosystems and to propose concrete mechanisms for monitoring and adapting tourism practices over time.

The limitation of not having insights from local communities, policymakers, or other stakeholders, has to be mentioned in the conclusion section

 

Author Response

Reviewer #1

The article addresses the important issue of balancing biodiversity conservation with tourism development, a key challenge for sustainable development in ecologically sensitive regions. The Dabie Mountains, a region with rich biodiversity and cultural heritage, provides a valuable case study.

Comment: The inclusion of GIS and remote sensing techniques ensures detailed spatial analysis, adding depth to the study. However, while the InVEST model and other tools are powerful, the study could benefit from ground validation or community input to corroborate model outputs with local realities.

Response: Thank you for your recognition of our work and for providing valuable suggestions to improve our study. We appreciate your observation regarding the need for ground validation or community input to corroborate model outputs with local realities. This study primarily focuses on the identification and assessment of eco-tourism spaces and potential tourism development areas based on ecological models and traditional villages, serving as the first step of our research. As part of the next phase, we plan to conduct field surveys and community interviews in the identified spatial areas. This approach will enable us to refine our understanding of eco-tourism and develop more scientifically grounded planning strategies. We believe that this sequential process-starting with spatial analysis and moving towards on-the-ground validation-will provide a robust foundation for our study and ensure practical applicability. Thank you again for your insightful feedback.

Comment: Qualitative results, such as the spatial distribution of habitat quality and potential tourism development areas, are clearly outlined. However, GDP and population density impact on habitat quality or tourism dynamics is limited presented.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback and insightful comments. We agree that GDP and population density are important evaluation indicators, especially for assessing conventional tourism development spaces and resources. However, since our study area is a mountainous region with relatively low GDP contributions and sparse population density, these two socio-economic indicators have a limited influence on the evaluation of potential eco-tourism resources. Therefore, we chose the distribution and locations of traditional villages as alternative variables to better reflect the characteristics and potential of eco-tourism in this specific context. We hope this explanation clarifies our methodological choices, and we sincerely appreciate your constructive input to help us improve the manuscript.

Comment: The study combines ecological data with cultural elements, such as traditional villages, highlighting the interdependence of natural and human systems. However, historical and anthropological significance of traditional villages importance is not presented.

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback. We acknowledge the deficiency in the exploration of cultural elements of traditional villages that you have pointed out in our research. Based on the existing research, we have further sorted out and summarized the historical and cultural information contained in traditional villages in the introduction. We have elaborated on their significant importance in regional cultural inheritance and the formation of ecological protection awareness from a qualitative perspective. Through these qualitative descriptions, the historical and anthropological values of traditional villages are demonstrated to a certain extent, and we have emphasized the importance of protecting these cultural connotations in tourism development, which provides a basis for further in-depth research.

Please see the details in line 117-133.

Comment: Ecosystem services with tourism planning are linked and use to strengthen the argument for sustainable development and ecological conservation. However, a discussion on their applicability to other regions facing similar challenges section will improve the article.

Response: Thank you for your constructive comments. We highly agree with your suggestion of adding a discussion on the universality of research findings. We have incorporated in the discussion an emphasis that the theoretical framework and methods for the spatial configuration and sustainable protection of ecotourism resources constructed in this study possess a certain degree of generality. It is expounded that the InVEST model has universal applicability and is especially proficient in measuring ecosystem services in complex ecological environments and under increasing tourism pressures. It can quantify habitat quality, identify regions of significant ecological importance, and demarcate an "ecological boundary" for tourism planning. This provides inspiration for other regions facing similar challenges, thereby enhancing the universality of the research findings to a certain extent.

Please see the details in line 397-411.

Comment: The study will benefit from a section in discussion on the long-term impacts of tourism development on ecosystems and to propose concrete mechanisms for monitoring and adapting tourism practices over time.

Response: Thank you for your valuable comments. We acknowledge that it is a deficiency that we did not specifically set up a section to discuss the long-term impact of tourism development on the ecosystem in our research. During the research process, through a literature review of the long-term follow-up studies in regions with similar ecosystems and tourism development models, combined with the prediction of the characteristics of the ecosystem and the trend of tourism development in the research area, we propose in the discussion section that a long-term ecological monitoring system should be established, covering key indicators such as biodiversity, soil quality and water quality, and it should be combined with regular on-site investigations and remote sensing monitoring. Based on the monitoring data, thresholds should be determined. When the thresholds are exceeded, measures such as limiting the number of tourists, optimizing the layout of facilities and adjusting the types and intensities of development activities should be taken. In addition, a community feedback channel should be established to encourage residents to conduct supervision. Based on the feedback, tourism practice strategies should be optimized in a timely manner to achieve a long-term balance between ecology and tourism.

Please see the details in line 440-457.

Comment: The limitation of not having insights from local communities, policymakers, or other stakeholders, has to be mentioned in the conclusion section

Response: Thank you for your valuable feedback. Due to the limitations of research time and resources, we failed to conduct in-depth investigations targeting these groups during the research process. This may lead to an insufficiently comprehensive research perspective and inaccurate understanding of the actual needs of tourism development and the difficulties in implementing ecological protection. We have clearly added an elaboration of this limitation, namely the lack of insights from local communities, policymakers or other stakeholders, in the conclusion section. We plan to strengthen cooperation with various stakeholders in subsequent research. For example, we will cooperate with community organizations to carry out participatory research, widely collecting community opinions through forms such as community interviews, questionnaires, and residents' meetings; actively communicate with policymakers, participate in relevant policy seminar meetings to ensure that the research is closely integrated with policy orientation; establish a cooperation platform with stakeholders such as tourism enterprises and environmental protection organizations to jointly explore the sustainable development model of ecotourism, thereby enhancing the comprehensiveness, scientificity and practicality of the research.
Please see the details in line 494-506.

Thank you for your consideration. We are looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

All authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors analyse a geographical area in China (Dabie Mountains) based on the concepts of ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation and cultural preservation. The use of tools such as the InVEST model, the kernel density analysis and the geographic detector, provide strength to the study. The proposals for tourism planning derived from the analysis are also interesting.

However, the work has some shortcomings in terms of its novelty that should be addressed.

As for the methodology used, although it is appropriate and rigorous, it has already been widely used in previous studies. It would be interesting for the authors to highlight what they add to this approach or what this approach can provide that is new to the study developed.

As far as their contribution is concerned, it is mainly limited to the specific geographical context of the Dabie Mountains. The authors should highlight the original contribution of their paper by more explicitly comparing this study with previous similar studies and highlighting the originality and contribution of the present study. The manuscript would also benefit from indicating how the results obtained could be generalised, for example by exploring the applicability of the approach according to the type of region, or by suggesting methodological adaptations that could increase its global relevance.

Finally, the text has similarities in terms of structure and approach with previous papers. It is necessary to differentiate the present manuscript, paying particular attention to the sections "reused" from other works, and explicitly mentioning how the contribution of this study differs from previous ones.

Author Response

Reviewer #2:

The authors analyse a geographical area in China (Dabie Mountains) based on the concepts of ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation and cultural preservation. The use of tools such as the InVEST model, the kernel density analysis and the geographic detector, provide strength to the study. The proposals for tourism planning derived from the analysis are also interesting. However, the work has some shortcomings in terms of its novelty that should be addressed.

Comment: As for the methodology used, although it is appropriate and rigorous, it has already been widely used in previous studies. It would be interesting for the authors to highlight what they add to this approach or what this approach can provide that is new to the study developed.

Response: Thank you for recognizing the appropriateness and rigor of the research methods. Although the methods used are common in previous studies, this research has innovative optimizations in parameter calibration and data fusion. For example, in the InVEST model, the weights of threat factors are accurately determined according to the ecological characteristics of the Dabie Mountains, such as considering the sensitive factors of endemic species and the weights of the impact of regional climate on habitats. This conforms to the local reality and improves the accuracy of the model in regional ecological assessment, providing an example of parameter optimization for the application of similar models in complex mountainous areas. The kernel density analysis focuses on traditional villages and combines with the spatial analysis technology of Geographic Information System (GIS) to explore the spatial correlation rules between topography, water system distribution and village layout, revealing the relationship between regional cultural inheritance and geographical environment. This is a new perspective of method application and provides a reference for multi-method integrated research.

Please see the details in line 397-411.

 Comment: As far as their contribution is concerned, it is mainly limited to the specific geographical context of the Dabie Mountains. The authors should highlight the original contribution of their paper by more explicitly comparing this study with previous similar studies and highlighting the originality and contribution of the present study. The manuscript would also benefit from indicating how the results obtained could be generalised, for example by exploring the applicability of the approach according to the type of region, or by suggesting methodological adaptations that could increase its global relevance.

Response: We appreciate your comments regarding the contribution and originality of our research. Indeed, we agree that there is room for improvement in our methodology. We have addressed these points in the revised manuscript, particularly in the Discussion section, where we highlight the potential for further generalization of our results and propose methodological adaptations that could increase the global relevance of the approach.

Now it goes like this: “Our study’s primary contribution was its focus on the specific geographical context of the Dabie Mountains, providing valuable insights into eco-tourism development in a region with unique ecological and socio-economic characteristics. However, the findings were somewhat limited in their generalizability due to the focus on a single region. To enhance the originality and relevance of the study, future research should integrate additional socio-economic data, such as GDP and population density, which could offer a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics influencing eco-tourism development. These socio-economic factors are critical for assessing the viability of tourism ventures and understanding how they interact with ecological systems. Moreover, to improve the practical applicability of the proposed eco-tourism planning strategies, future work should include field surveys and community-based validation in the identified potential development areas. Such empirical data will strengthen the scientific foundation of the planning recommendations, ensuring that they are not only theoretically sound but also applicable to real-world scenarios. By addressing these aspects, future studies could provide more robust, scalable insights into eco-tourism planning, with implications for broader regions beyond the Dabie Mountains.”

Please see the details in line 455-470.

Comment: Finally, the text has similarities in terms of structure and approach with previous papers. It is necessary to differentiate the present manuscript, paying particular attention to the sections "reused" from other works, and explicitly mentioning how the contribution of this study differs from previous ones.

Response: Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and for highlighting this important issue. The concern you raised regarding the similarities in structure and approach with previous papers was also noted by the editor. In response, we have revised the manuscript to reduce redundancies and ensure that the content is distinct and original. We believe that the current version now adheres to academic standards and clearly differentiates our contribution from previous studies.

Thank you for your consideration. We are looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

All authors

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper has been sufficiently improved and the flaws have been addressed.

There are some minor typographical errors. The authors should revise the final version to check that everything is correct.

Author Response

Comments:

The paper has been sufficiently improved and the flaws have been addressed. There are some minor typographical errors. The authors should revise the final version to check that everything is correct.

Response:

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our paper again. We have thoroughly checked the entire manuscript, including the wording, sentences, and punctuation, to ensure that everything is correct. We appreciate your valuable feedback and suggestions. Please see the details in line 159, 216, 219, 445, and 451 with read colour.