Evaluation on the Protection and Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage in She Township, Jingning from the Perspective of Ecological Civilization
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article entitled “Evaluation on the Protection and Development of Intangible
Cultural Heritage in She Township, Jingning from the Perspective of Ecological Civilization” is interesting and according to the scope of the journal. It is publishable after addressing following comments.
1. The abstract should start with main objectives of the study.
2. Please add the policy implications at the end of abstract.
3. You must have to write a table of abbreviation and place it before introduction section but after abstract.
4. Please add structure of article at the end of introduction section.
5. In equation 6, you have written the prediction error (h). You must have to check it’s normality and add it’s empirical results in the revised article. Or in the revised article, you may simply add an assumption with given studies as “The given error term is assumed to be normally distributed at zero mean value and constant variance [1,2]”. As this assumption is added by previous studies [1-3].
[1] Examining the asymmetric impact of COVID-19 pandemic and global financial crisis on Dow Jones and oil price shock
[2] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan. Technovation. Volume 117, 102255.
[3] Estimating smart energy inputs packages using hybrid optimisation technique to mitigate environmental emissions of commercial fish farms.
6. Please replace with heading of section 5 with Results and Discussion
7. You must have to compare the results of your study with previous published literature.
8. Please add the empirical results in the conclusion section.
9. Please add policy implications, limitations of the study and recommendations for future studies at the end of conclusion.
Author Response
Review 1
- The abstract should start with main objectives of the study.
Answer: In response to this question, appropriate content has been added to the article and modified.
- Please add the policy implications at the end of abstract.
Answer: Modifications have been made to link the policy to the ICH protection development improvement model.
- You must have to write a table of abbreviation and place it before introduction section but after abstract.
Answer: The article only has the abbreviation of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH), and the abbreviation list may not be necessary.
- Please add structure of article at the end of introduction section.
Answer: New additions have been added to the fourth part of the introduction.
- In equation 6, you have written the prediction error (h). You must have to check it’s normality and add it’s empirical results in the revised article. Or in the revised article, you may simply add an assumption with given studies as “The given error term is assumed to be normally distributed at zero mean value and constant variance [1,2]”. As this assumption is added by previous studies [1-3].
Answer: This section has been removed because it may be redundant.
[1] Examining the asymmetric impact of COVID-19 pandemic and global financial crisis on Dow Jones and oil price shock
[2] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan. Technovation. Volume 117, 102255.
[3] Estimating smart energy inputs packages using hybrid optimisation technique to mitigate environmental emissions of commercial fish farms.
- Please replace with heading of section 5 with Results and Discussion
Answer: The content has been modified
- You must have to compare the results of your study with previous published literature.
Answer: The article has been revised
- Please add the empirical results in the conclusion section.
Answer: The article has been revised
- Please add policy implications, limitations of the study and recommendations for future studies at the end of conclusion.
Answer: The content has been added to the article.
Reviewer 2 Report
In the introduction, I recommend delving into the concept of ecological civilization to understand the man-nature relationship, as a key element to understand the value of the intangibility of cultural heritage. I suggest that in order to understand the problem of point 2) The issue of the intangible cultural heritage heirs, it is necessary to know to which area of the PCI they transmit or to what practices they refer to with this component, because otherwise it is not clear. vision of the effects it causes, give an example. Within section 3) Ignorance of protection, the idea is very repetitive, it is necessary to strengthen this component, there are even state elements that influence the ignorance of protection, the absence of normative socialization or even the absence of the same regulations for the safeguard process, would be some of the elements that strengthen the seriousness of this component. Regarding the Experimental Design and Purpose of the Protection and Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage section, it should be noted how the process of applying the models was carried out, since the process is still very ambiguous, preventing understanding how the information was collected, how it was systematized and what inputs were used to measure each of the elements calculated in the comparison models. Once the data collection process is clarified, it will be possible to better understand what is detailed in the results.Finally, in the conclusions it would be good to include the limitations of the study, as well as the implications that this type of evaluation has for the PCI in other territories.
Author Response
Review 2
In the introduction, I recommend delving into the concept of ecological civilization to understand the man-nature relationship, as a key element to understand the value of the intangibility of cultural heritage. I suggest that in order to understand the problem of point 2) The issue of the intangible cultural heritage heirs, it is necessary to know to which area of the PCI they transmit or to what practices they refer to with this component, because otherwise it is not clear. vision of the effects it causes, give an example. Within section 3) Ignorance of protection, the idea is very repetitive, it is necessary to strengthen this component, there are even state elements that influence the ignorance of protection, the absence of normative socialization or even the absence of the same regulations for the safeguard process, would be some of the elements that strengthen the seriousness of this component. Regarding the Experimental Design and Purpose of the Protection and Development of Intangible Cultural Heritage section, it should be noted how the process of applying the models was carried out, since the process is still very ambiguous, preventing understanding how the information was collected, how it was systematized and what inputs were used to measure each of the elements calculated in the comparison models. Once the data collection process is clarified, it will be possible to better understand what is detailed in the results.
Finally, in the conclusions it would be good to include the limitations of the study, as well as the implications that this type of evaluation has for the PCI in other territories.
Answer: 1.The concept of ecological civilization has been added to the text. 2. The section on bearers of intangible cultural heritage has been revised. 3. The relevant content has been modified. 4. Relevant content has been added to the fifth section. 5. The limitations of this study have been expressed
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear author(s)
The study aims to develop indicators to assess Intangible Cultural Heritage conservation and development strategies. However, there is a noticeable lack of preparation with regard to submissions to peer-reviewed international journals. The following should be improved first.
Correction of typographical errors:
When checking the manuscript, typos and other errors are noticeable. For example, in the abstract, there is "calls the ICH protection and development model proposed in this paper the ICH protection development improvement model”. The manuscript should be checked in its entirety and such typos should be eliminated.
Introduction:
This introduction should be rewritten from scratch. The introduction should be rewritten from scratch, because it only lists the previous studies and does not clearly state their contributions, their limitations and the contribution of this study to them, in a narrative fashion.
Theoretical background:
Prior to the statistical analysis, the author attempts to explain the theoretical background of the evaluation indicators for Intangible Cultural Heritage conservation and development strategies. However, the conceptualisation is made without much reference to the concepts and theories of previous studies, as well as to case studies and data. As a result, it lacks objectivity and cannot be said to have a sufficient theoretical background, which seems to be the author's original argument. A more general and objective theoretical background should be developed by referring to similar studies.
Statistical analysis:
The author attempts to quantify the evaluation based on his own evaluation indicators. Despite the fact that the authors state that they perform some empirical analyses, the necessary information for statistical causal analysis, such as test quantities, is not provided in the manuscript. Therefore, the figures and tables in the manuscript appear to be mere descriptive statistics. A more rigorous empirical analysis should be performed and reported.
Conclusions:
In the conclusions, policy implications, contributions and limitations of the study could be discussed.
Sincerely.
Author Response
Review 3
Correction of typographical errors:
When checking the manuscript, typos and other errors are noticeable. For example, in the abstract, there is "calls the ICH protection and development model proposed in this paper the ICH protection development improvement model”. The manuscript should be checked in its entirety and such typos should be eliminated.
Answer: Translations have been optimized.
Introduction:
This introduction should be rewritten from scratch. The introduction should be rewritten from scratch, because it only lists the previous studies and does not clearly state their contributions, their limitations and the contribution of this study to them, in a narrative fashion.
Answer: The introduction has been added.
Theoretical background:
Prior to the statistical analysis, the author attempts to explain the theoretical background of the evaluation indicators for Intangible Cultural Heritage conservation and development strategies. However, the conceptualisation is made without much reference to the concepts and theories of previous studies, as well as to case studies and data. As a result, it lacks objectivity and cannot be said to have a sufficient theoretical background, which seems to be the author's original argument. A more general and objective theoretical background should be developed by referring to similar studies.
Answer: The content has been added to the article.
Statistical analysis:
The author attempts to quantify the evaluation based on his own evaluation indicators. Despite the fact that the authors state that they perform some empirical analyses, the necessary information for statistical causal analysis, such as test quantities, is not provided in the manuscript. Therefore, the figures and tables in the manuscript appear to be mere descriptive statistics. A more rigorous empirical analysis should be performed and reported.
Answer: The content has been added to the article.
Conclusions:
In the conclusions, policy implications, contributions and limitations of the study could be discussed.
Answer: The introduction has been added.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The article entitled “Adaptation to Climate Change at the Macroregional Level: Governance, Strategies, and actors in two Alpine Regions” is written very well and according to the journal's scope. It is publishable after addressing the following comments:
1. I highly suggest breaking the long sentences into small sentences throughout the article so that it can easily be understandable for readers.
2. Please provide the main policy implications at the end of the abstract.
3. To reduce the article's length, you may remove the structure from the introduction.
4. The author has written a lot of interesting literature from Asia. It is recommended to add a few studies from Western countries.
5. I am mainly concerned with the given error term (m) in equation 5. You have to normalize the error term and write its empirical result in the revised article. If you cannot do it, you may simply add an assumption with given studies [1-3] in the revised article as “The given error term (m) is assumed to be normally distributed at zero mean value and constant variance [1-3].”
[1] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan. Technovation
[2] Understanding cognitive and socio-psychological factors determining farmers’ intentions to use improved grassland: Implications of land use policy for sustainable pasture production. Land Use Policy
[3] Fossil fuels, foreign direct investment, and economic growth have triggered CO2 emissions in emerging Asian economies: Some empirical evidence
*** Authors should not ignore the above comment.
6. I can see, in many places, authors have not justified the study's findings with previous literature. Therefore, I highly recommend justifying each study finding with previous literature.
7. At the end of the conclusion, authors must write the main limitations and recommendations for future studies.
Author Response
Review 1
The article entitled “Adaptation to Climate Change at the Macroregional Level: Governance, Strategies, and actors in two Alpine Regions” is written very well and according to the journal's scope. It is publishable after addressing the following comments:
- I highly suggest breaking the long sentences into small sentences throughout the article so that it can easily be understandable for readers.
Answer: Some long sentences have been optimized
- Please provide the main policy implications at the end of the abstract.
Answer: The policy meaning has been added to the article
- To reduce the article's length, you may remove the structure from the introduction.
Answer: Some contents in Part IV of the Introduction have been deleted
- The author has written a lot of interesting literature from Asia. It is recommended to add a few studies from Western countries.
Answer: Relevant literature has been added
- I am mainly concerned with the given error term (m) in equation 5. You have to normalize the error term and write its empirical result in the revised article. If you cannot do it, you may simply add an assumption with given studies [1-3] in the revised article as “The given error term (m) is assumed to be normally distributed at zero mean value and constant variance [1-3].”
Answer: The explanation of this formula has been added. Is this the change?
[1] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan. Technovation
[2] Understanding cognitive and socio-psychological factors determining farmers’ intentions to use improved grassland: Implications of land use policy for sustainable pasture production. Land Use Policy
[3] Fossil fuels, foreign direct investment, and economic growth have triggered CO2 emissions in emerging Asian economies: Some empirical evidence
*** Authors should not ignore the above comment.
- I can see, in many places, authors have not justified the study's findings with previous literature. Therefore, I highly recommend justifying each study finding with previous literature.
Answer: Relevant literature has been added
- At the end of the conclusion, authors must write the main limitations and recommendations for future studies.
Answer: The main limitations and suggestions of future research have been added
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors
The authors appear to have revised the typos in the manuscript. The conclusions have also been added and revised in line with the peer review report. However, corrections regarding the introduction, theoretical background and statistical analysis are still insufficient. The introduction in this manuscript is not of a standard that could be improved by the addition of a paragraph. The authors state that "ICH has not been studied based on the perspective of ecological civilization, and this paper studies ICH in Jingning Shexiang from the perspective of ecological civilization". To explain this, it is sufficient to cite [1-7] at the end of this sentence. If you are citing individual papers, you should make their relevance to your research more explicit and cite them. Otherwise, it is difficult for the reader to understand the contribution of your research. With regard to the theoretical background, this is also reinforced by the addition of two additional papers, but seems inadequate. As regards the statistical analysis, it does not seem to go beyond descriptive statistics. For these reasons, I cannot recommend to the editor-in-chief that this study be published in this journal.
Author Response
The authors appear to have revised the typos in the manuscript. The conclusions have also been added and revised in line with the peer review report. However, corrections regarding the introduction, theoretical background and statistical analysis are still insufficient. The introduction in this manuscript is not of a standard that could be improved by the addition of a paragraph. The authors state that "ICH has not been studied based on the perspective of ecological civilization, and this paper studies ICH in Jingning Shexiang from the perspective of ecological civilization". To explain this, it is sufficient to cite [1-7] at the end of this sentence. If you are citing individual papers, you should make their relevance to your research more explicit and cite them. Otherwise, it is difficult for the reader to understand the contribution of your research. With regard to the theoretical background, this is also reinforced by the addition of two additional papers, but seems inadequate. As regards the statistical analysis, it does not seem to go beyond descriptive statistics.
Answer:
- Relevant references have been modified and some of them have been replaced.
- Theoretical background has been added to relevant positions.
- This paper gives up the experimental method with simulation model as the core, and adopts the empirical way to study the protection and development of the intangible cultural heritage in the She Township of Jingning. The experimental part includes three parts: (1) Problems in the protection and development of ICH in Jingning She Township considered by relevant staff; (2) The respondents' evaluation on the status quo of ICH protection and development in She Township of Jingning; (3) Experts' evaluation of ICH conservation development improvement model
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors have address all previous comments and now paper is publishable in its present form.
Author Response
Reply: Thank you for your comments and I have made further revisions to the manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Author.
I cannot change a decision I have already made. You should probably revise your manuscript and resubmit it to another journal after reconsidering your analytical methods and other aspects.
Author Response
Reply: I have revised the manuscript according to previous comments, please check it again.
- The introduction has been changed again to replace Articles 8 to 14.
- Theoretical backgroundIn addition to the addition of two papers, content has been added in the fifth subsection of Part III.
- The experimental part has changed the idea, it is already an empirical analysis, and the number of tests is provided.
