Accounting for the Logic and Spatiotemporal Evolution of the Comprehensive Value of Cultivated Land around Big Cities: Empirical Evidence Based on 35 Counties in the Hefei Metropolitan Area
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2443663
Title: The accounting logic and spatiotemporal evolution of the comprehensive value of Cultivated land around big cities：Empirical Evidence based on 35 Counties in Hefei Metropolitan Area
General comments:
Exploring the utilization value of cultivated land around large cities is important for protecting the quantity, quality, and ecology of cultivated land. Taking the Hefei metropolitan area as an example, this study uses mathematical models and geological statistical methods to calculate the comprehensive value of cultivated land around major cities from 2010 to 2020, and analyzes its spatiotemporal evolution characteristics. Research has certain significance in improving the comprehensive value of cultivated land, promoting high-quality agricultural development, and achieving high-level protection of cultivated land in urban areas.
In recent years, there have been many research achievements on land change and driving mechanisms in the urbanization process of world hotspots. Overall, the structure of the manuscripts is complete and there are many methods used in the research. However, further improvement is needed in the English writing of the manuscripts. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the work only analyzes the dynamic changes in the value of cultivated land use, and the analysis of the driving mechanism of such changes is insufficient. It seems that only the phenomenon is described, and the analysis content of the mechanism needs to be strengthened. There are obvious shortcomings in the discussion section, which did not compare the results of the studied region with those of other regions worldwide.
Detailed comments:
(1) English needs improvement;
(2) Punctuation errors: inconsistent use, for example: Line 119 ((Figure. 1)); Line 299: There are two colons (The calculation formula is as follows:); Line532: There is no punctuation before the last sentence 'The value of production decreased.';
(3) Formula errors: Line 167-168: In formula (1), symbol A does not appear, but symbol A appears in the explanation. Please check the correctness of the formula and symbol; Line 177-178: Ellipsis appears in formula (2), please add its meaning to the author; Line 271-272: The meaning in formula (11) is not explained;
(4) Line 348: The article appears with two Figure 1, without Figure 2;
(5) The labeling format of references is not consistent with other places, such as Line 366 ([21-23 [45]); Line 397 ([30] - [33]);
(6) The singular and plural are not consistent: Line 158 (Economic value) and Line 173 (Social values); Line197-198 (cultivated land resources.) and Line 204 (cultivated land resources;)
(7) The full text images are very blurry, and the text and numbers on the images cannot be clearly seen. Please ask the author to replace them with clearer images;
(8) Line 335-337: Not all available resources are assets, as Marx stated in Capital that a piece of cultivated land, compared to an uncultured piece of land with the same natural properties, has a greater value. Please verify if there are any issues with the logic before and after.
(9) Line 114: The study area selection section did not mention the 35 districts and counties to be studied;
(10) Introduction: In view of the large number of empirical cases of Chinese scholars on the comprehensive value accounting of cultivated land resources, Table 1 lists the typical results of the research on the value accounting of cultivated land in China. It is suggested that the author analyze the methods and angles of the research on the value accounting of cultivated land from the global and Chinese perspectives, so as to make the research more reliable;
(11) Line 152-157: There is ambiguity before and after mentioning 9 dominant value types such as economy, society, ecology, and culture in the text;
(12) The social stability value calculated by formula (4) is the same as the development right value calculated by formula (5), and the symbol explanation is also understandable. Please check the correctness of the formula and symbol explanation to ensure the credibility of the results;
(13) Supplementary analysis of the reasons for changes in the value of cultivated land in urban areas;
(14) The Abstract and discussion parts need improvements;
As a conclusion, major revision required.
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2443663
Title: The accounting logic and spatiotemporal evolution of the comprehensive value of Cultivated land around big cities：Empirical Evidence based on 35 Counties in Hefei Metropolitan Area
General comments:
Exploring the utilization value of cultivated land around large cities is important for protecting the quantity, quality, and ecology of cultivated land. Taking the Hefei metropolitan area as an example, this study uses mathematical models and geological statistical methods to calculate the comprehensive value of cultivated land around major cities from 2010 to 2020, and analyzes its spatiotemporal evolution characteristics. Research has certain significance in improving the comprehensive value of cultivated land, promoting high-quality agricultural development, and achieving high-level protection of cultivated land in urban areas.
In recent years, there have been many research achievements on land change and driving mechanisms in the urbanization process of world hotspots. Overall, the structure of the manuscripts is complete and there are many methods used in the research. However, further improvement is needed in the English writing of the manuscripts. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the work only analyzes the dynamic changes in the value of cultivated land use, and the analysis of the driving mechanism of such changes is insufficient. It seems that only the phenomenon is described, and the analysis content of the mechanism needs to be strengthened. There are obvious shortcomings in the discussion section, which did not compare the results of the studied region with those of other regions worldwide.
Detailed comments:
(1) English needs improvement;
(2) Punctuation errors: inconsistent use, for example: Line 119 ((Figure. 1)); Line 299: There are two colons (The calculation formula is as follows:); Line532: There is no punctuation before the last sentence 'The value of production decreased.';
(3) Formula errors: Line 167-168: In formula (1), symbol A does not appear, but symbol A appears in the explanation. Please check the correctness of the formula and symbol; Line 177-178: Ellipsis appears in formula (2), please add its meaning to the author; Line 271-272: The meaning in formula (11) is not explained;
(4) Line 348: The article appears with two Figure 1, without Figure 2;
(5) The labeling format of references is not consistent with other places, such as Line 366 ([21-23 [45]); Line 397 ([30] - [33]);
(6) The singular and plural are not consistent: Line 158 (Economic value) and Line 173 (Social values); Line197-198 (cultivated land resources.) and Line 204 (cultivated land resources;)
(7) The full text images are very blurry, and the text and numbers on the images cannot be clearly seen. Please ask the author to replace them with clearer images;
(8) Line 335-337: Not all available resources are assets, as Marx stated in Capital that a piece of cultivated land, compared to an uncultured piece of land with the same natural properties, has a greater value. Please verify if there are any issues with the logic before and after.
(9) Line 114: The study area selection section did not mention the 35 districts and counties to be studied;
(10) Introduction: In view of the large number of empirical cases of Chinese scholars on the comprehensive value accounting of cultivated land resources, Table 1 lists the typical results of the research on the value accounting of cultivated land in China. It is suggested that the author analyze the methods and angles of the research on the value accounting of cultivated land from the global and Chinese perspectives, so as to make the research more reliable;
(11) Line 152-157: There is ambiguity before and after mentioning 9 dominant value types such as economy, society, ecology, and culture in the text;
(12) The social stability value calculated by formula (4) is the same as the development right value calculated by formula (5), and the symbol explanation is also understandable. Please check the correctness of the formula and symbol explanation to ensure the credibility of the results;
(13) Supplementary analysis of the reasons for changes in the value of cultivated land in urban areas;
(14) The Abstract and discussion parts need improvements;
As a conclusion, major revision required.
Author Response
请参阅附件。
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1. The structure of abstract: problem, aims, method, finding results. Please revise the abstract!
2. Introduction: the idea of paragraph is not clear, longs sentences (line 105 to 109).
3. Figure 13: please descrice clearly in the mathod the criteria for classification cold, hot spot
4. Author must discuss more based on the resluts
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Must be revised!
Author Response
请参阅附件。
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors present an interesting study on the calculation and importance of value of cultivated land resources of Hefei, China. The bright side of the manuscript is to provide practical details on related topic. In this context, the study contributes to different fields. However, some points are missing (mentioned below) in the manuscript and some parts of the manuscript are not easy to understand. Therefore, I would like to make some suggestions to improve the quality of the paper as below:
General Comments
Some parts of the manuscript are not easy to understand (mentioned below in specific comments). There are many long sentences and wordiness. This situation disrupts the flow of the subject and the continuity of the reading. Because of this reason, authors should re-reconsider writing some parts of the manuscript.
The authors explained the methods in detail. However, methods section is too long. Authors should give only the important parts of the methods and detail may be given as a supplementary file. Also, unnecessary parts and long sentences should be removed or rephrased.
The Discussion section should be enriched with a more theoretical interpretation and relate the present results with additional concepts. For instance, the study results can be discussed with similar studies from different countries in the broader context. Also, the results can be discussed in the framework of ecological land value, urban ecosystems, ecosystem services. In this context, the discussion section needs structural changes.
6 Conclusions and Discussion should be given separated sections “4. Discussion” and “6 Conclusions”
Moreover, the limitations of the study should be given in the conclusion section.
Specific Comments
Line 30: The importance of the findings and how the findings contribute to further studies and different field should be added here. In this way, the bridge between the problem and the solution found by the authors would be stronger.
Lines 45-48: Please rephrase here.
Line 94-99: Please rephrase this paragraph with shorter separate sentences.
Line 112: Tab.1 -> Table 1
Line 422: 3. Result Analysis - > 3. Results
Author Response
请参阅附件。
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2443663
Title: The accounting logic and spatiotemporal evolution of the comprehensive value of Cultivated land around big cities：Empirical Evidence based on 35 Counties in Hefei Metropolitan Area
Comments:
The authors have made revisions one by one according to the first round review comments, and the quality of the manuscript has been greatly improved.
Please read the entire manuscript thoroughly to further check for minor errors and standardize the reference format, and so on.
As a conclusion, I have no additional comments of the acceptance of the work.
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2443663
Title: The accounting logic and spatiotemporal evolution of the comprehensive value of Cultivated land around big cities：Empirical Evidence based on 35 Counties in Hefei Metropolitan Area
Comments:
The authors have made revisions one by one according to the first round review comments, and the quality of the manuscript has been greatly improved.
Please read the entire manuscript thoroughly to further check for minor errors and standardize the reference format, and so on.
As a conclusion, I have no additional comments of the acceptance of the work.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors improved the manuscript with previous comments.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
