Land Cover Change Analysis to Assess Sustainability of Development in the Mongolian Plateau over 30 Years
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The aim of this paper was to elucidate the general sustainable development status of the Mongolian Plateau using land cover data for the years 1990, 2000, 2010, 2015 and 2020, and to compare differences in its two different geographical units in Mongolia and Inner Mongolia, China.
The experiment presented in the paper was good designed and clearly explained. The results are important both from the theoretical and practical point of view when analysing of the impacts of global climate change. In terms of forest management practices and climate change vulnerabilities aspect, modelling is an important tool and technique explaining the exact current status of some lands.
The principal findings of the paper consist on: Pattern and change of land use (Forest area, Grassland area, Cropland area, built area, Water area, Barren area, Sand area); Analysis of land use degree (Land use dynamic degree, Comparative analysis of Mongolia and Inner Mongolia).
The strengths point of the article has given by: it is found an adequate foundation and a clear definition of the research objectives, being established on the basis of the results obtained so far in the field addressed; the research methodology is elaborated briefly; the data in this section is detailed and clear to ensure replication; the research results are presented in a completed paper comprising: text with elevated and concise expressions, expressive graphic representations; the data analysis is based on a well-structured model, being surprised the most relevant aspects of the research data; the conclusions are in agreement with the quantitative results.
One note: The figures maybe a little bigger as well as the writing in them for a better visibility.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is interesting in looking at study of land use changes where there is no examination for the past 30 years. However, additional review of what type of development for the past 30 years that was given emphasis by those responsible in development might influence the case study are suggested to be in the manuscript. Thus, specific section on the government initiative of development is needed and should take into account of what might changes occurred in the land used.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Based on land cover data from 1990-2020, the study reveals the process of land-use change on the Mongolian plateau and integrates those changes with sustainable development goals to further evaluate regional sustainable development. However, the scientific significance is unclear, and the method used in this study is mature. The detailed recommendation is listed below:
1. The abstract and introduction are meaningless and need to be completely revised. In the introduction, the authors only describe the current state of studies on regional land-use changes, and the theoretical basis for linking land-use area to sustainable development goals is lacking, and no relevant studies are cited. The sentences in lines 96-97 are uncritical, try to not use absolute words like no and none.
- It is necessary to add a flow chart to facilitate the reader to understand more clearly the concept of the article.
- How is the land use rating for different land-use types determined in Table 2?
- The quality of figures in this study needs to be improved.
- It is not significant to compare the land-use changes in Mongolia and Inner Mongolia in section 3.2.2.
- Why does the increasing land use change state in rows 510-511 indicate that the overall land carrying capacity is increasing? If so, it may contradict the trend of declining water, forest and grassland areas.
- The conclusion and abstract need to be refined accordingly based on the comments.
- Are there any different trends in Mongolia and Inner Mongolia? The LUCC is largely influenced by social-economic development and related land use policy. I believe it will have some variation in these two countries.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The improvement of the MS is very limited. And the authors did not explain how they revised the paper according to the comments. I can't agree with the contribution of scientific problems.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
