Intention and Action: Evaluating the Policy Antecedents of Development
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I feel that the issue of the paper is interesting. However, there are some points to be revised.
- Introduction is too long. How about making a literature review section?
- Making a diagram about methodology is recommended for easy understanding.
- There are too many numbers in the tables of the results. How about changing key points into graphs?
- Discussion section is too long. How about making a subsection in the discussion section? And there are a few existing papers. Please add more existing papers.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please see the attachment
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Reviewer 2,
Thank you for the time in reviewing this paper. Please find our responses below.
Reviewer’s Comments I like the idea of this paper. This paper examines an interesting topic on land use and planning. In particular, the empirical analysis is conducted to elaborate the main theme of the research topic. In general, this paper is written and organized well. I have only a few minor comments to be made. Please see my comments below.
- The introduction is comprehensive, but it is not read well. I would suggest the authors to delete some of the unnecessary materials and highlight the main contribution of this paper to the sizable body of the literature on the relevant issues. Moreover, it is important to convince the readers that the case of the US can be a good example to elaborate the main theme of the paper. In my opinion, this is importance given that “Suitability” is an international journal.
We revised the introduction to streamline the main contribution- an evaluative approach to the policies and procedures that govern development. We added a statement acknowledging the reviewer’s central point that while development management ordinances are associated with US development procedures, our research is applicable to any development scenario that combines policy with administrative review.
- The empirical analysis is based on the statistical tests of the means between two samples. However, I wonder if there is any other factors that have been controlled for. The authors may have to elaborate this or provide more evidence on this point.
We reorganized the Materials and Methods section to make it clear that the two study watersheds were comparable in most aspects (except growth rate) and restate this finding in the Results section. We are unaware of a statistical method that will allow for two sample, comparison of means test to control for additional variables and the sample size falls below the threshold for a regression (n=30).
- In the end of this paper, the contribution of the authors should be made clearly.
We clarified the contribution of authors using a blinded format.
Reviewer 3 Report
This is pure theory and statistics and not sustained by original experiments, spatial analysis, technical support, effective spatial examples, watershed real technical and spatial analysis etc. All is based, only, on literature and official reports and statistics.
In fact, in the special issue of Urban Green Infrastructure for Climate Proof and Healthy Cities, it will not be the only article of this type ......
Perhaps, a clear specification of the type of scientific message was more useful, directly from the title ...
Where are the study objectives?
Where are the study locations? Is the reader sent to other sources for documentation and clarification?
The authors speak about riparian buffers. Probably, the reader wants to see any of these buffers ....
Where are the real Material and Methods? Are these the papers or reports produced by others?
Author Response
Reviewer 3,
Thank you for the time in reviewing this paper. Please find our responses below.
This is pure theory and statistics and not sustained by original experiments, spatial analysis, technical support, effective spatial examples, watershed real technical and spatial analysis etc. All is based, only, on literature and official reports and statistics.
This research is a policy analysis substantiated by content analysis, which is the basis for the statistical findings. We focus on the policies that govern riparian buffers because the incorporation of best available science and administrative procedures at this level helps shape what is developed at a physical site. In short, without policies and administrative procedures that incorporate best available science and promising administrative practices, we are unlikely to see development (in this case, riparian buffers) that are designed for optimal functioning.
In fact, in the special issue of Urban Green Infrastructure for Climate Proof and Healthy Cities, it will not be the only article of this type ......
We are not privy to the other types of articles in this special issue. However, we believe a policy analysis paper would be a viable addition.
Perhaps, a clear specification of the type of scientific message was more useful, directly from the title ...
Based on your suggestion, we revised the title to “Intention and Action: Evaluating the Policy Antecedents of Development”. We are open to additional suggestions to craft a stronger, more descriptive title.
Where are the study objectives?
The study research questions and objectives are outlined in the Introduction section. The revisions of the introductory section suggested by the other reviewers should help highlight the study’s objectives more clearly.
Where are the study locations? Is the reader sent to other sources for documentation and clarification?
The study locations are described in the Materials and Methods Sections. We placed this information in this section as these details necessary to replicate this study with respect to our sample. We provide our protocol in its entirety in the Supplementary materials.
The authors speak about riparian buffers. Probably, the reader wants to see any of these buffers ....
Given the restriction on length of the paper, the focus on policy analysis, and the hopeful placement of the article in a special use on Urban Green Infrastructure for Climate Proof and Healthy Cities, we are confident readers will either be familiar with riparian buffers or be able to mobilize outside resources for visual representations of riparian buffers.
Where are the real Material and Methods? Are these the papers or reports produced by others?
This research is a policy analysis. The sample is comprised on the policies and administrative procedures covering development with respect to riparian buffers. These documents contain the laws and rules a jurisdiction uses to govern development and are usually produced in conjunction with legal experts and policymakers.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
-
