Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Transformation Models for Chinese Urban Villages: Demolition/Relocation Market-Oriented and New Rural Construction
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper addresses a contemporary topic in rural China and is worthy of investigation.
The reviews are good with many sources across a range of relevant fields and though the situation is interpreted through the authors eyes it does provide a good reading of the situation. Experiences however vary across the country and I think there ought to be a little more inclusion of a reflection of different experiences that might be found in different regions of the country.
The narrative gives direction though I would suggest scoping out what is to come in future sections a little more clearly in the introduction.
The main thrust of the research concentrates on two villages. Whilst these do make interesting comparisons it was a little disappointing that a wider range was not incorporated. At this stage of the paper it is mot possible to go back and increase the number but inclusion of reflection in section 3 on what might be found in other regions and in different 'villages' is necessary. These limitations should also be covered in more depth in the conclusions section.
Whilst the English is understandable I think a final review could clear up and enhance the narrative. There are also a number of punctuation type mistakes which could be icked up.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
We thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript titled “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Villages' Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-based and New Rural Construction” (ID: MDPI-sustainability 512136). Meanwhile, we are also very grateful for your insights, which have really improved the quality of the paper and has resulted in the article that is clearer, more compelling and broader. The following summarizes how we responded to your comments:
Point 1: The reviews are good with many sources across a range of relevant fields and though the situation is interpreted through the authors eyes it does provide a good reading of the situation. Experiences however vary across the country and I think there ought to be a little more inclusion of a reflection of different experiences that might be found in different regions of the country.
Revision result 1:The UVs’ reconstruction mainly consists of three models in China: market-oriented, government-oriented and village-collective self-development. After the reform and opening up, the Pearl River Delta is the most representative area of China's UVs phenomenon, because of the priority of urbanization. For example, Qianshan village in Guangzhou and Yangji village in Zhuhai have succeeded in attracting developers as main body of UVs’ reconstruction by bundling the land with bidding and auction. Since then, the whole country has followed suit. In the less developed western region at a lower marketization level, however, the transformation effect is not ideal. The government-oriented type is a traditional UVs’ reconstruction model, which is mainly applied to the new district construction and the pilot villages integrated to establish residential areas, such as high-tech zone and rural-to-residential apartment construction. However, due to the government’s limited financial resources, this model faces bigger capital investment problem. As a result, it's on a small scale implementation. The village collective-oriented is that the village collective joint-stock company alone undertakes reconstruction work, formulates the demolition-compensation ratio and standards, and raises funds to carry out the reconstruction. Up to now, such a few cases have occurred in the old villages with small scale and sufficient investment capacity of the villagers. Although these villages have various independent development paths and organizational structures, they are all based on collective economic accumulation, with the redistribution of rights and interests and the transformation of governance models as breakthrough points, rural industrialization as development opportunities. For instance, Shenzhen's Tianbei model realizes the transformation to the industrial collective economy, through building materials industry front store and back factory way to industrial clusters. Another example is the “super village” that relies on the rise of township and village enterprises in the Yangtze River Delta. The villages with such transformation conditions are also called “new collectivist villages” because they have seen the village unitization turn in the transformation.Apparently, the new rural construction model introduced in this paper also belongs to the third model. It should be noted that, different from the previous transition of “industrial villages”, the new rural construction model is through land property leasing to commercial village transition. (Quoted from the original article 1. Introduction)
Point 2: The narrative gives direction though I would suggest scoping out what is to come in future sections a little more clearly in the introduction.
Response 2: China's urban villages are an unique way for Chinese peasants to enter the cities; UVs’ transformation often leads to inefficiency in resource use or rising transaction costs due to excessive distribution of property rights,resulting in “tragedy of the commons”.The improper treatment of land property right will bring many problems to UVs’ renovation and reconstruction,the problem of land ownership determination is the difficulty and key point of the UVs’ transformation in the future.So we should pay attention to the urban integration problem,and from the property rights theory to explore how to clear land rights, activate the collective land resources.
Revision result 2: In the UVs’ reconstruction in the future, more attention should be paid to the relationship between citizens, villagers and floating population, and the supporting laws and regulations that are conducive to clarifying land property rights to ensure productive resources integration and property rights privatization. For example, some specific issues should be concentrated on - how collective land enters the market, how to define the right to develop and build on the former rural collective land, and how to legalize the construction of small property houses and so forth. Promoting transformation with the help of non-market folk society is a sustainable exploration and a valuable attempt in the future research. (Quoted from the original article 1. Introduction)
Point 3: The main thrust of the research concentrates on two villages.Whilst these do make interesting comparisons it was a little disappointing that a wider range was not incorporated. At this stage of the paper it is mot possible to go back and increase the number but inclusion of reflection in section 3 on what might be found in other regions and in different 'villages' is necessary.These limitations should also be covered in more depth in the conclusions section.
Response 3:First of all,China hasn’t yet established a nationwide database of urban villages,so it is difficult to obtain relevant national data,but our team has been conducting investigation on all UVs in Lanzhou since 2018,so an introduction of the urban villages to inner city is feasible.
Revision result 3:In Lanzhou, UVs are mainly distributed in four municipal districts of Chengguan, Anning, Qilihe and Xigu, forming a dual-nuclear cluster center of Chengguan-Anning and several secondary centers. With rapid urbanization and integration of construction land in the urban area of Lanzhou since 1990, a total of 83 UVs need to be reconstructed, which are divided into 4 types: in-situ reconstruction, relocation reconstruction, local reconstruction + environmental renovation and comprehensive renovation. Among them, in-situ reconstruction is the commonest, followed by relocation reconstruction. In the old urban area such as Chengguan District, UVs are most densely distributed. In this context, we selected representative UVs that are currently in in-situ reconstruction and relocation reconstruction in Chengguan District as study cases. (Quoted from the original article 3.1. Case Study Area )
It is difficult to reveal some specific details and interest demands in UVs transformantion. Although the village case study can be very in-depth and meticulous,it is also limited by separate case’s particularity and lacks universal explanatory ability.Therefore, the study will be incorporated in a larger comparison and assessment in the future.Furthermore,It is also necessary to summarize the types with broader dialogue capabilities.(Quoted from the original article 5.3.Limitation)
Point 4: Whilst the English is understandable I think a final review could clear up and enhance the narrative.There are also a number of punctuation type mistakes which could be picked up.
Response 4:We've correct the punctuation type mistakes.
Thanks for all the help
Best wishes
Yours sincerely,
Yang Yongchun, Liu Qing
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper details the demolition of agricultural villages with subsequent reconstruction, where the unsustainable nature of the action with respect to various parameters emerges.
In this long paper it is not clear whether the cultural value of the groups was evaluated before the demolition started, it is not clear what the future of the demolition materials is, and it is not clear what the delocalisation strategies are.
Only with respect to a greater multidisciplinary knowledge (therefore economic, social, architectural, etc.) of this action in its entirety can assessments be made about whether this practice is sustainable.
Despite the length of the paper, it is not clear what the purpose of the paper is. Furthermore, the part that describes the analyses is inadequate, especially because of generalisations.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your comments concerning our manuscript entitled “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Villages' Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-based and New Rural Construction”(ID: MDPI-sustainability 512136). Your comments are very valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researchers. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. The main corrections in the paper and the responds to the reviewer’s comments are as following.
Point 1:The paper details the demolition of agricultural villages with subsequent reconstruction, where the unsustainable nature of the action with respect to various parameters emerges.In this long paper it is not clear whether the cultural value of the groups was evaluated before the demolition started, it is not clear what the future of the demolition materials is, and it is not clear what the delocalisation strategies are.
Response 1: As far as we know,the government has made a unified assessment of the cultural value before the 15 UVs’ reconstruction in Yantan district.After the assessment, the two villages studied in this paper were found not to have historical cultural value or historical traditional buildings,they’re all simple village forms,composed of brick structure of bungalows built by the villagers.But with the appreciation of land values in UVs brought by rapid urbanization and the vast market for floating population seeking low-rent housing in urban areas, every household is adding house areas on their homesteads of different sizes and shapes to expand their rentable floor space.Above the second floor,in order to maximize the residential area,the buildings on both sides of the street stretch out almost covering open space,space high compression and high floor ratio are the morphological characteristics of the original villages.
Revision result 1:In the future,the end of villages and the end of peasants are the final destination of the two UVs,which includes three aspects,(1)The end of physical sense,that is,the demolition of houses and the demobilization of villagers.(2)The end of organizational entity,that is,the disintegration of village administration,economic and social organizations.(3)The end of social relations,that is,the exit of "Acquaintance Society".The villagers who choose monetary resettlement in XV have to make their own living,the villagers who choose house resettlement will be allocated to various phrase of resettlement communities,the original villagers are scattered and distributed in different urban space,the consanguinity and geopolitical relationship will be gradually faded and dissolved,so above three dimensions will all come to an end.Although BNV will not face demolition in the near future,the villagers fear that they will face further UV reconstruction by government in the next decade,and their vested interests will not be safeguarded.With its own economic strength,BNV has expanded its economic boundary through market networks,administrative boundary has been changed with the transformation of a village committee into a village community.After investigation we found that the villagers have become more and more adaptable to the urban lifestyle and values,and village value system has been diversified gradually.With the trend of further urbanization and non-agriculturalization in the future,the cultural boundary and the social boundary will be further merged with the city to complete the citizenization progress of agricultural transfer population.The difference from XV is that BNV retains a complete village social relations network and belongs to continuous transformation.In the future,if government guides and governs properly, the end of the villages may be only physical sense and organizational entity,the core of its social boundary won’t be scattered.(Quoted from the original article 5.2 Discussion )
Point 2: Despite the length of the paper, it is not clear what the purpose of the paper is. Furthermore,the part that describes the analyses is inadequate,especially because of generalisations.
Response 2: In this paper, through the sustainable comparison of the two UVs’ reconstruction models, aiming to establish a government—market—village collective transformation chain,and to supplement the previous research patterns which only focus on the role of government and developers.
Revision result 2:Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to compare and analyze the residential sustainability of NRCM and D/RMM, to pay more attention to the transformation model based on the folk power, and to further fill the gap that previous studies only focus on the role of the government and developers in UVs’ transformation. In UVs, a set of transitions have been appearing- from the village to the community, from the peasants to the residents, from agriculture to non-agriculture residents,original villagers as the most influential interest groups are involved in the process of village withdrawal and construction. Studying their residential sustainability to the newly-settled community has practical implications for making better use of community participation in promoting UVs’ reconstruction.(Quoted from the original article 1. Introduction)
Thanks for all the help
Best wishes
Yours sincerely,
Yang Yongchun, Liu Qing
Reviewer 3 Report
Overall, the paper is an interesting and relevant contribution. It potentially adds a new case study based perspective on two Chinese community development models—with the potential to push more socially sustainable policies and practice in the burgeoning urban (specifically urban village) development in China.
The paper’s overall organization has an appropriate balance between sections. However, the it lacks clarity in both sentence and paragraph structure. There are also a number of typos. This lack of clarity makes a thorough review process difficult. A revised manuscript would allow more thorough editing of the research content. If this paper is ultimately accepted and published, it needs a significant edit for English clarity. These errors ideally would be corrected with the help of an English-speaking copy editor.
The paper seems methodologically rigorous, but too often the methods are not clearly backed by previous studies. For example, numerous metrics about sustainability need more explanation, both in the background and the methods sections. Some of the statistical analysis is beyond this reviewer’s expertise. The context of Chinese development is also beyond my expertise.
There are a number of specific suggestions below (which refer to the document’s line). Because of the clarity and wording problems mentioned above, there are many errors not mentioned below. Instead, an English copy editor can help with such a process.
Line notes:
2-6 The title can and should be simplified. There are too many prepositional phases. While the subject is complicated and a likely requires a detailed title, the current title is confusing. Perhaps it is changed to something like: “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-based and New Rural Construction.”
46-47 This opening sentence is very confusing. The reader must work too hard for understanding. Rewrite in active voice.
46-61 Define “urban villages” in this paragraph. Readers can infer what is meant by this term, but it is too critical in the paper to not define it at the outset.
81 Change “twice” to “two.”
81-101 This paragraph is very important to set up the paper. It is confusing—are the authors stating results from this study that then set-up the impetus for this study? If so, that doesn’t make sense. Instead, make it clear what provided the rationale for this study, and be careful and clear about stating results in the introduction.
101 Capitalize first letter of the sentence.
175 What is meant by “reform and opening up”?
204-206 Perhaps the authors should describe different types of social capital (e.g., bonding, bridging, and linking social capital) and how they are generally manifest in these situations. This term and definition is important, including the variations in social capital.
255-263 These are important points. Rephrase to add clarity. Also, the last sentence is incomplete.
320-333 The sampling method seems valid. Rewrite this paragraph for clarity. Also, it could be helpful to state the population, sampling frame, and sample. This is done, more or less, but adding those terms would make it clear which is which.
334-355 Is the Housing Quality Index the work of the authors or a sustainability metric established by other scholars/research? It is unclear and therefore difficult to judge the external and internal validity (including, importantly, construct validity) of this metric.
357-358 This claim needs evidence through citations and/or more explanation from the authors.
394 and 403 Percentages in text and table do not agree (is it 38.33 % or 36.67%?). The table should change “proportion” to “percentages.”
563-end This discussion is where the paper shines the most. It frames the case studies in the larger mechanisms and contexts of these two development processes. These sections also suffer from lack of clear writing, but it is here where the significance of the research is highlighted the most. Therefore, it is imperative it be edited for clarity.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
We thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript. Meanwhile, we are also grateful for your positive and constructive insights and comments on manuscript entitled “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Villages' Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-oriented and New Rural Construction” (ID: MDPI-sustainability 512136).We have studied reviewer’s comments and have made revision.But the original line number has changed after the revision.For your convenience, I have marked the corresponding part with blue background,thank you very much for your guidance.The following is the concrete revisions:
Overall, the paper is an interesting and relevant contribution. It potentially adds a new case study based perspective on two Chinese community development models—with the potential to push more socially sustainable policies and practice in the burgeoning urban (specifically urban village) development in China.
The paper’s overall organization has an appropriate balance between sections. However, the it lacks clarity in both sentence and paragraph structure. There are also a number of typos. This lack of clarity makes a thorough review process difficult. A revised manuscript would allow more thorough editing of the research content. If this paper is ultimately accepted and published, it needs a significant edit for English clarity. These errors ideally would be corrected with the help of an English-speaking copy editor.
The paper seems methodologically rigorous, but too often the methods are not clearly backed by previous studies. For example, numerous metrics about sustainability need more explanation, both in the background and the methods sections. Some of the statistical analysis is beyond this reviewer’s expertise. The context of Chinese development is also beyond my expertise.
Response:(1)Due to some problems in the author's English level and expression,some sentences and paragraph structures of the article lack clarity. During this time, we have edited and revised the article as a whole again to try to make the expression clearer.
(2) The three measurement perspectives on residential sustainability are established through our discussion.The sub-indicators selected in each section refer to the literature in the relevant field,we have supplemented these documents and cited them in corresponding locations.With regard to Housing Sustainability indicators,we refer to the relevant papers on the housing situation of rural floating population and peasants[49-54],supplementing the sustainability content with previous indicator structure.Housing Facilities Index is based on the measurement method of the paper on housing patterns and impact mechanisms of New Urban Migrants in the Acta Geographica Sinica[55],and to update facilities content according to the housing situation difference of the relocatable communities in UVs.Housing quality index has referenced to the evaluation method of the paper in the Acta Geographica Sinica[56].As for sub-indicators of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability,we find precedent and research support in some degree papers on satisfaction evaluation of UVs’ renovation[57-63].In summary,because our research theme is the residential sustainability of the two urban reconstruction models,our research methods and indicators are more developed based on the relevant literature of previous urban village transformation,such as satisfaction evaluation of urban village transformation[57-62],housing quality and residential pattern[49-54] ,market-based transformation model [60,61],self-renewal model[62] and urban integration of floating population in UVs [63],etc.The indicators explanation has been supplemented in the background of chapter 3.2. Survey Design and interpretation of specific indicators(1),(2),(3) section.
[49]Jiang L.W.Pang L.H.;Zhang Z.M.Living Conditions of Floating Population in Urban China.Population Research,2004,29(4):16-27.
[50]Wang R.;Feng K.W.Promotion of peasant housing since the reform and its reasons:A
[51]Empirical analysis on home survey data.Journal of China Agricultural University,2017,22(3):198-204.
[52]Gu J.;Xu J.C.;Lu K.Progresses and challenges of the rural housing in China.China population.resources and environment,2013,23(9):62-68.
[53]Lin L.K.;Zhu Y.;Liang P.f.;Xiao B.Y.The spatial patterns of housing conditions of the floating population in China based on the sixth census data.Geographical Research,201433(5)：887-898.
[54]Qi H.F.; WangW.Q.An analysis of the housing security system based on population flow.City Planning Review,2015,39(2):31-37.
[55]Li Z.G.Housing conditions,patterns and mechanisms of second generation migrants in urban china:A case study of six large cities,2012,67(2):189-200.
[56]Zhao M.F;Qi W.;Liu S.H.Spatial differentiation and formation mechanism of floating population communities in Beijing.Acta Geographica Sinica,2018,73(8):1494-1512.
[57]Xu T.T.A study on satisfaction measurement on residential quarters from agriculture to
[58]non-agriculture in Hangzhou.Zhejiang University of Technology,2008.
[59]Zhang B.B.A comparative studyonthesatisfactionofresidentsinShantytown —taking Hangzhou and Yichang as the research objects.Zhejiang University of Technology,2017.
[60]Research on residence satisfaction of the tenant in urban village—Take Tangxia urban village as example.South China University of Technology,2014.
[61]Zhang X.Research on residents satisfaction in urban village reconstruction under market dominance.Zhejiang University,2018.
[62]Liu L.Studies on urban milage renewal of independence—take Shenzhen for instance.Wuhan University,2014.
[63]Wang M.F.;Cheng H.;Ning Y.M.Social integration of migrants in Shanghai's urban villages.Acta Geographica Sinica,2015,70(8):1243-1255.
There are a number of specific suggestions below (which refer to the document’s line). Because of the clarity and wording problems mentioned above, there are many errors not mentioned below. Instead, an English copy editor can help with such a process.
Line notes:
Point 1:2-6 The title can and should be simplified. There are too many prepositional phases. While the subject is complicated and a likely requires a detailed title, the current title is confusing.Perhaps it is changed to something like: “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-based and New Rural Construction.”
Response 1:In the light of your pertinent suggestion,the title has been changed to"Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Villages' Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-based and New Rural Construction."
Point 2: 46-47 This opening sentence is very confusing. The reader must work too hard for understanding. Rewrite in active voice.
Response 2:Residential landscape is widely defined as the environmental landscape of the residential zone[1-3]. It is human settlement which include residential building, residential artificial environment landscape, natural environment landscape and facilities (i.e., the external space environment). (Quoted from the original article 1. Introduction)
Point 3:46-61 Define “urban villages” in this paragraph. Readers can infer what is meant by this term, but it is too critical in the paper to not define it at the outset.
Response 3:The landscape of UVs is rather unique under the special institution of China. Against the background of urban suburbanization, industrial decentralization and rural urbanization, lots of rural settlements and communities in the far and near suburbs of cities have entered industrialization and urbanization environment passively in China. Original rural settlements are surrounded by urban construction land, resulting in mixed communities with a typical urban-rural dual structure. It’s embodied in the "exogenous" rental economy relying on rental houses and collective properties, the informal institution or social relations of villagers based on consanguinity and kinship, the essence of which is still traditional rural social settlement. (Quoted from the original article 1. Introduction)
Point 4: 81 Change “twice” to “two.”
Response 4:It has been corrected in the104 lines of the revised article.
Point 5:81-101 This paragraph is very important to set up the paper. It is confusing—are the authors stating results from this study that then set-up the impetus for this study? If so, that doesn’t make sense. Instead, make it clear what provided the rationale for this study, and be careful and clear about stating results in the introduction.
Response 5:In fact,from the beginning we have intended to write this article from Urban village,a special Chinese residential landscape,but at that time, the specific writing ideas were not very clear,so we conducted a trial investigation on UVs of Lanzhou in November 2018.We stated an interesting phenomenon discovered during the investigation process,which provides some inspiration for our writing ideas.But we don't preconceived judge which kind of residential sustainability is high only according to the villagers' different attitude to these two models,and choose to use empirical research to measure “whose residential sustainability is high?How much higher? Why High? ”these series of questions,this is the impetus of our research.
Point 6:101 Capitalize first letter of the sentence.
Response 6:It has been corrected in the127 lines of the revised article.
Point 7:175 What is meant by “reform and opening up”?
Response 7:The reform and opening-up policy was initiated by the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee in December 1978,consisting of internal reform and external opening up.Internal reform is mainly to adjust the production relationship,in the countryside,mainly to establish the Household contract responsibility system,the state-owned enterprises’ autonomous management rights have been significantly improved.Opening up to the outside world to establish a socialist market economy,implementing special opening policies in Guangdong and Fujian provinces,establishing a special economic zone in Shenzhen.Since then,China's opening up has developed from the coast to the interior,forming the open pattern of a special economic zone—coastal open cities—coastal economic open zones—inland.
Point 8:204-206 Perhaps the authors should describe different types of social capital (e.g., bonding, bridging, and linking social capital) and how they are generally manifest in these situations. This term and definition is important, including the variations in social capital.
Response 8:The social capital accumulated by UVs is mainly social relationship network of villagers,informal institution and the mutual trust environment.China's village is an acquaintance society based on the village-community relations network,so social capital here performs relationship resources that depend on the old acquaintance circle,whose traditional logic is "informal institution" that is maintained by traditional ethics,family network and interpersonal relationship and credit.Closed and conservative is root character of Chinese smallholder,they believe and are more willing to maintain strong ties based on consanguinity,geographical relation and kinship relation over many years than to develop external weak ties.In addition,indigenous people,floating population outside,low-cost operators and consumers,each group take what they need in the UVs, hence UVs are an indispensable living space for the people at the cities’ bottom.This stable supply-demand relationship is also the vitality of existence and development in the UVs. (Quoted from the original article 2.2. Demolition/relocation-oriented market model of Urban Villages )
Point 9:255-263 These are important points. Rephrase to add clarity. Also, the last sentence is incomplete.
Response 9:(1)A lot of young and middle-aged laborers from villages go to work in cities,and hollow village phenomenon stands out[47].Driven by economic marketization and urban-rural income gap,lots of young and middle-aged laborers flow into cities for odd jobs,and the remaining are still vulnerable groups such as the elderly and children in the new countryside. Moreover, many peasants are more inclined to go to a city to buy a house than to move into a new rural community due to its value-added function,while rural houses have little space for appreciation.(2)Lack of the atmosphere of local rural life.Formalist unified planning neglects villages diversity, resulting in phenomenon "one face of a thousand villages", in which peasants lack the traditional local rural atmosphere, and even the original rural life form is difficult to maintain due to the loss of young and middle-aged population. Above all have affected rural development sustainability.(3)Lack of economic driving force,investment and financing channels are blocked. The new rural construction mainly aims at relatively poor outlying villages, collective economic strength is weak. As a result, most of villagers go outside to work,hence the planning and construction impetus is insufficient.(Quoted from the original article 2.3. Construction of new socialist countryside)
Point 10:320-333 The sampling method seems valid. Rewrite this paragraph for clarity. Also, it could be helpful to state the population, sampling frame, and sample. This is done, more or less, but adding those terms would make it clear which is which.
Response 10:In order to ensure the quality of samples to and reduce the selection bias, we conducted a survey by door-to-door and adopted equidistant sampling method according to the family address in two UVs. One sampled household was selected from every 5 households, to ensure that the probability of each original household being selected is equal. In addition, most Chinese rural families are relatives with consanguinity and kinship living together. Athough the UVs are transformed and each family experienced housing allocation, it’s common to disengage from the original family and make up a new nucleus family, and they still live in the same transformed community. Against this background, we randomly selected one of households with same clan relationship in a community to reduce the independence of each household in the sample. After the reconstruction, there are 2280 inhabitants, 670 households, 2120 inhabitants, 634 households in BNV and XV respectively. These two villages have similar characteristics in terms of population distribution, family structure and occupational composition. Hence, 134 and 127 questionnaires were distributed in the two villages, respectively. (Quoted from the original article 3.2. Survey Design )
Point 11:334-355 Is the Housing Quality Index the work of the authors or a sustainability metric established by other scholars/research? It is unclear and therefore difficult to judge the external and internal validity (including, importantly, construct validity) of this metric.357-358 This claim needs evidence through citations and/or more explanation from the authors.
Response 11:Sustainable indicators of housing quality have been selected through our discussion,but this measurement method is based on a literature in the Journal of Acta Geographica Sinic—the evaluation method of the floating population’s socio-economic status in urban villages[56],We have already cited this article in the corresponding position.Therefore,the method of assigning weight and classifying hierarchical structure for indicators is based on other scholars’ research,but the selection of indicators is the author's work.
[56]Zhao M.F;Qi W.;Liu S.H.Spatial differentiation and formation mechanism of floating population communities in Beijing.Acta Geographica Sinica,2018,73(8):1494-1512.
Point 12:394 and 403 Percentages in text and table do not agree (is it 38.33 % or 36.67%?). The table should change “proportion” to “percentages.”
Response 12:The females in BNV should be 36.67%,I’m very sorry for my negligence when inputting the data of the table,in addition,the table has changed “proportion” to “percentages.”
Point 13:563-end This discussion is where the paper shines the most.It frames the case studies in the larger mechanisms and contexts of these two development processes. These sections also suffer from lack of clear writing, but it is here where the significance of the research is highlighted the most. Therefore, it is imperative it be edited for clarity.
Response 13:We have tried our best to improve our English express and re-edit these section.
Thanks for all the help
Best wishes
Yours sincerely,
Yang Yongchun, Liu Qing
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The title clearly defines the aim of the research
It is difficult to follow the contents of chapter 1 and 2, and of the paragraph 3.1.
They are closely linked to the specific economic and social situation of China, it is not easy to understand all the "dynamics" proposed.
The research requires the analysis of heterogeneous data, and the use of the factor analysis method is appropriate.
Paragraph 3.2.1 “Indicator interpretation of housing situation sustainability” does not provide clear explanations on the nature of the indicators (Table 1 in Appendix A).
The same can be said for the paragraph 3.2.2 “Indicators interpretation of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability” (Table 2 in Appendix A).
It could be useful / appropriate to provide explanations about "construction/definition" and "meaning" of the "indicators" (bibliographical references?).
Paragraph 4 Result: it is not easy to link the written text with “Table 2” and Figure 2”; where is Figure 2c? (probably table 3?); in general it is not easy to follow the discussion/interpretation of the results.
Conclusions and discussion: it would be interesting to discuss if the proposed methodology could be transferred to other economic and social contexts (evolutions, differences, …).
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
We thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript. Meanwhile, we are also grateful for your positive and constructive insights and comments on manuscript entitled “Comparing the Residential Sustainability of Two Chinese Urban Villages' Transformation Models: Demolition/relocation Market-oriented and New Rural Construction” (ID: MDPI-sustainability 512136).We have studied reviewer’s comments and have made revision. The following is the concrete revisions:
Point 1:It is difficult to follow the contents of chapter 1 and 2, and of the paragraph 3.1.
They are closely linked to the specific economic and social situation of China, it is not easy to understand all the "dynamics" proposed.
Response 1:First of all,chapter 1 points out that Urban village is a kind of unique residential landscape under the special institution of China,and the UVs’ reconstruction also involves many aspects of sustainable residential evaluation.Then we analyze the background and current situation of Chinese UVs’ transformation since the reform and opening up.Since the reform and opening up, almost all of China's Urban Villages(UVs) have adopted a demolition/relocation market-oriented model(D/RMM).In recent years, the new rural construction model(NRCM),originally only used to improve rural development and sustainability,has occasionally been practiced in the UVs’ transformation process —a way of that basically safeguards collectivism and the traditional interests of villagers.A comparative analysis of the sustainability of the two can reveal the differences between institutional designs and their social effects,including changes in the redistribution of benefits.Then we point out that UVs have their subsistent rationality in urbanization process in China at the present stage,if it is properly guided and governed,it can promote economic and social benign transition.Finally,we introduce the findings and doubts of our investigation in UVs,the purpose of the research and some preliminary thoughts on what is to come in future.
Chapter 2 is a literature review,the theoretical construction of the analytical perspective and the introduction of two transformation models.Because the article is mainly based on the perspective of the original villagers to analyze the residential sustainability after the transformation,compared to the physical level of sustainability (such as housing conditions, community environment sustainability),livelihood security sustainability behind the villagers is the essential factor that really affects residential sustainability,so we use the analytical paradigm of sustainable livelihood theory to design questionnaire indicators,comparative dimension and impact mechanism of residence sustainability,this is where the theory is linked to this paper.Then the paper introduces the background, purpose, scope of application, operation process, advantages and disadvantages of the two models,so that readers are more familiar with analysis background of this paper.
Section 3.1 is an introduction to the case area.First of all,from October 2018, we started to investigate all UVs in Lanzhou that were included in the reconstruction,so it is necessary to introduce UVs’ current situation in Lanzhou.Then we introduce the location, population and economic situation, concrete reconstruction background ,reconstruction process, method and present situation of the two villages.In short, above parts of the article are intended to give readers a better understanding of macro,micro background and the context of the article writing.
Point 2: The research requires the analysis of heterogeneous data, and the use of the factor analysis method is appropriate.Paragraph 3.2.1 “Indicator interpretation of housing situation sustainability” does not provide clear explanations on the nature of the indicators (Table 1 in Appendix A).The same can be said for the paragraph 3.2.2 “Indicators interpretation of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability” (Table 2 in Appendix A).It could be useful / appropriate to provide explanations about "construction/definition" and "meaning" of the "indicators" (bibliographical references?).
Response 2: First of all,the composition and interpretation of "Indicator interpretation of Housing Sustainability Situation" are given the sub-indicators and weight assignment method in Appendix A1,perhaps I did not elaborate enough,so in the original 3.2. Survey Design (1) Indicators Interpretation of Housing Situation sustainability is supplemented accordingly.In addition,in 3.2. Survey Design (1) Indicators interpretation of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability,indicator selection reason,definition and quantification process are added,thank you for your valuable advice.
Revision result 2:
(1)Indicators Interpretation of Housing Situation sustainability
Choose five indices closely related to housing sustainable characteristics, its definition and quantification operation as follows (Appendix A1),(1)Housing Ownership Index (HOI),the property right (non-own=1;self-own=2) and housing source (rented house=1; accommodation=2;self-built house=3;self-purchased house=4) are used to measure;(2)Housing Congestion Index (HCI),we use per average housing area(m2) and housing structure to measure it.The division of per average housing area refers to “GB 50180-93 standard of the Code for Planning and Design of Urban Residential Areas”(<=20m2=1;21~35m2=2;36~45m2=3;>=46m2=4);The housing structure is measured by housing set ratio.Generally speaking,the per average housing area is large and the family with the suite house is less crowded.(3)Housing Undisturbed Index (HUI), here from housing privacy and housing function to measure.Housing privacy through question,the score is divided into “substantially satisfied=5;somewhat satisfied=4;neutral=3;somewhat disssatisfied=2;substantially dissatisfied= 1”.Housing function by asking whether the housing is merely a residential function or has other uses(Living room=2;Both life,production and business use=1);(4)Housing Facilities Index (HFI),it is based on the measurement method of a paper about housing patterns and impact mechanisms of New Urban Migrants in the Acta Geographica Sinica[55],and we’ve updated facilities content according to the housing situation difference of the relocatable communities in UVs,which is the sum of following three sub-indices.Specifically,21 items housing facilities were listed, and villagers selected the facilities they owned, if they have all listed facilities,they will score 42 points. The former seven items are basic facilities (including tap water, power facilities, natural gas, heating, flush toilet, water heater, water supply and drainage facilities),each item scores 1 point; Items 8~14 are intermediate facilities (including lighting, fire fighting, elevator, parking lot, garbage collection, gate guard and Monitoring, broadband network),each item scores 2 points;Items 15~21 are advanced facilities (including fitness and entertainment venues, cultural and sports facilities, educational facilities, community parks and squares, medical facilities, business services, landscape sketch and rest places),each item scores 3 points,then we calculate the total score of each questionnaire based on the above rules and the calculation method of Appendix A2. All kinds of index values range from 0 to 1,the higher the number, the better the facility configuration.(5)Housing Quality Index (HQI). Choose the building quality, ventilation and lighting, housing area indicators, the score is measured by the five-point Likert,which has referenced to the evaluation method of the paper in the Acta Geographica Sinica[56].Specific calculation method as follows:
(1)
where: HQI is the sum of three indicators, and its value ranges from 1 to 15.According to the equidistance method, housing quality is divided into three categories: when HQI < 5, the quality of housing is “low quality”;when HQI is 5~10, housing quality is”medium quality”; when HQI > 10, housing quality is “advanced quality".
(2)Indicators interpretation of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability
Residential environment and livelihood security sustainability are the essential factors affecting living quality.Based on factor analysis method,19 indicators were selected from two aspects of residential environment and livelihood security sustainability ,and they were measured by the five-point Likert scale,specific indicators and their operational definitions are as follows(Appendix A2):residential environment measurement includes property management(X1),public facilities supporting(X2),landscape greening(X3),community security(X4),public activity places and community organization(X5).Location conditions of residential areas not only have an important impact on villagers' daily travel and work,but also have a potential market thrust to stimulate tenants' rental behavior.Therefore,we select the convenience of public transport around(X6),distance between the relocation area and city centre(X7),and commuting status(X8) as indicators for location conditions measurement.Stability of income source(X9) is directly related to residents’ livelihood protection,through the question "how stable do you think your family's main income source is”;Work intensity and tiredness after transformation(X10) not only reflect villagers’ physical and mental fatigue,but also indirectly reflect the occupational class,through following question"Is your work intensity and fatigue level very high? (substantial high=5;somewhat high=4;neutral=3;somewhat low=2;substantial low=1)" and "Which kind of work nature does your job belong to? (work physical labor=3;self-employed vendor type=2; non-manual labor=1)” after transformation to measure,work intensity and fatigue level are the sum of the two items scores;Income increase or decrease situation(X11) is a direct reflection of villagers’ livelihood situation after the transformation,through the question “Whether your overall income has increased after the renovation? (yes=2;no=1)”.In view of many scholars' emphasis on social relations importance in the community to villagers’ lives,we select indictors of friendliness and support of community members(X12),scope of making friends in the community(X13) , acquaintance social reservation situation(X14) and the impact of social networks on livelihood security(X15) to measure,the scores are measured with "substantially agree=5;somewhat agree=4;neutral=3;somewhat disagree=2;substantially disagree =1";Acquaintance social reservation situation(X14) is measured by"whether your acquaintances circle in the old village remains after the transformation(yes=2;no=1).We use coverage level(X16) and guarantee level(X17) of the villagers' social insurance to measure the social security situation. Considering that the villagers have turned to non-agriculture households, so rural insurance is not considered. Coverage level is the sum of the following insurance types (endowment insurance, medical insurance, unemployment insurance, industrial injury insurance and other social insurance),each insurance accounted for 1 point.As for guarantee level,we use the Likert scale to score guarantee level corresponding to above chosen insurance,through the question”how secure is your above chosen insurance respectively?(substantial high=5;somewhat high=4;neutral=3;somewhat low=2;substantial low=1)”,, overall social protection level is the ratio of the sum of selected insurance coverage levels and guarantee level.Satisfaction degree of settlement compensation(X18) and willingness of long-term residence and old-age pension in relocation area(X19) are used to measure the psychological feeling.To avoid too many indicators, dimension structure is merged by factor analysis. These main factors can represent most of original factor information, and also show the structural dimension of residential Sustainability in UVs. They are converted into values between 1 and 100 points by standard score with main factor variance contribution rate as the weight, and calculate the composite score. New factors are transformed in the same way to get the specific scores of each dimension. The main expression equation of factor analysis is:
(2)
where: Xi represents the original indicator variable; Fm (m < i) represents the unobservable common factor, which synthesizes the original i indicator information;ε represents the information part that is not included as a special factor.(Quoted from the original article 3.2. Survey Design(2))
Point 3:Paragraph 4 Result: it is not easy to link the written text with “Table 2” and “Figure 2”; where is Figure 2c? (probably table 3?); in general it is not easy to follow the discussion/interpretation of the results.
Response 3:The paragraph 4 is mainly for table 3 data description analysis. Table 3 is mainly a comparison of the villagers’ income structure before and after of UVs’ transformation,the structure ratio of the villagers to each source of income is different before and after transformation.Table 3 is actually the previous figure 2c,originally the income structure ratio is expressed in the form of a figure.Finally,in the revision stage of the paper, we think it may be more standardized to change the form,so it is made into Table 3.I am very sorry that the chart reference name has not been changed in the original text due to my negligence,which causes unnecessary misunderstanding for you.I have changed the reference name of the corresponding location to Table 3. (For your convenience, I have marked out the content with yellow background of section 4.1 in the original article).
Point 4:Conclusions and discussion:it would be interesting to discuss if the proposed methodology could be transferred to other economic and social contexts (evolutions, differences, …).
Revision result 4:The UVs’ self-renewal has the following suggestions in the economic aspect,(1)The government should establish the supporting policies for the economic transformation of the community joint-stock Company.At present,the community joint-stock company is semi-market operation and semi-corporate management,at the same time undertakes the duties of social management and municipal construction in UVs,and corporate governance based on administrative village governance model.So in the future we should separate the duties of social management and municipal construction from community joint-stock company,and make the community neighborhood committee and community work station responsible respectively.(2)The government should set up a special investment and financing platform for UVs’ self-renewal to solve the problem of investment and financing difficulties ,and reduce the risk of village collectives’ independent investment.(3)The government should establish a revenue distribution mechanism that is conducive to balancing fairness and efficiency.The rural collective construction land and the urban land should share the same power,and the establishment of a unified urban and rural construction land market are the direction of China's land system reform in the future.In the social aspect:(1)The village collective should establish a community self-government mechanism that conforms to the transformation demand.Its governance structure should be adapted with the modern market economy.(2)The government should establish guiding policy of UVs’ self-renewal and reform.First of all,the government should guide the village collective to participate in the land re-planning,as far as possible not by the way of the demolition and reconstruction for renovation.In addition,village collective should be allowed to collectively develop remaining land.We recommend that the government should promulgate policies to guide remaining land of property development.Third,it’s necessary to protect the continuance of village's internal industries and promote industrial development and increase employment. (Quoted from the original article 5.2. Discussion)
Thanks for all the help
Best wishes
Yours sincerely,
Yang Yongchun, Liu Qing
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
