Next Article in Journal
Is Sustainable Online Learning Possible with Gamification?—The Effect of Gamified Online Learning on Student Learning
Previous Article in Journal
A Methodological Assessment Based on a Systematic Review of Circular Economy and Bioenergy Addressed by Education and Communication
Article
Peer-Review Record

Health, the Outdoors and Safety

Sustainability 2021, 13(8), 4274; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084274
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2021, 13(8), 4274; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084274
Received: 16 March 2021 / Revised: 5 April 2021 / Accepted: 8 April 2021 / Published: 12 April 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments

  1. The contribution to the (international) literature should be stated.
  2. The empirical context of the paper should be motivated in the revised introduction.
  3. What is the external validity of the conclusions that are stated in the paper?
  4. The concluding section of the paper state practical policy conclusions that stem from the findings that are presented in the paper.

Author Response

Thank you for your time and comments. Our reply is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This article describes an example of this lasting tension in the context of public enjoyment in the open air.

 

In this process, this paper tends to present only two extremes. For example, there are natural and man-made playgrounds, beautiful street trees and trees that block the driver's view.

 

In addition to this dichotomous approach, it is believed that reviewing and supplementing the content from an appropriate point of view can present better research results.

As an example, it would be a better explanatory data to present a harmonious case in which nature and artificial parts to be presented as a conclusion are combined and presented in a picture. Real photos or schematic images can help.

Author Response

Thank you for yout time and comments. Our response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Interesting ariticle as the work introduces mew dimension around  compensatory decision process  on the aspect of health benefits and risks., However;  

i. Section 2: Materials and methods. Line 62-65, a quick check on the two reference materials cited here [21&22] revealed they are not available for  access on public domain based on this, it will be much better for the authors to provide brief run down of  the  methods to ensure the aundience have completed picture around the methods. 

ii. In furtherance considering  there are reference to individual partcipation in the process i.e. 3.3. The management of trees , line 156, this further demonstrate the need to extend  on the method decription to accomodate each. 

iii. Considering that the study also involved human partcipation, it will be approariate for the authors to provide update on ethical clearance prior to the data collection. 

iv. The work can benefir from further proof read to  improve the quality and appeal more the target audience.  

 

Author Response

Thank you for your time and comments. Our response is attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am happy with the revised version of the paper. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Many thanks for accepting to improve the quality of the paper.

Back to TopTop