Sustainable Urban Development: A Comprehensive Model for Assessing Health Risks from Compounded Pollution in Xi’an

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript proposes a health risk assessment model to addressing the combined effects of heatwaves and atmospheric pollution. By integrating hazard, exposure, and vulnerability factors using the entropy weight-TOPSIS method, the model provides a comprehensive analysis of the spatial distribution of health risks. The study is worthy of being developed, and from it, some results are obtained. However, some comments are still existent for revisions towards publication. They are as follows:

·         Abstract: it would be better to add a brief introduction to the existing problems. The results should be enriched much.

·         Introduction: the research gap should be much clearer.

·         What is added to this research area? The novelty should be more specific.

·         Section 4.1: for the results showing in L310-313, namely “the highest and lowest relative closeness levels ……. at 0.3294.”, it should be given with analysis instead of descriptions.

·         Section 4.2: the documented text should be explained with evidences.

·         Section 4.3: for the descriptions with “highest” and “lowest”, it is not enough to understand the meaning behind the results, which needs be with statements for justifications. Some similar issues may happen in the following sections.

·         Section 5: it is suggested to integrate the Discussion section into the descriptions for figures and tables presented in Section 4. Otherwise, it is very easy to check the context for better reading experience.

·         It is very strange to reach no conclusions for a research article.

·         The language expressions and text standardization should be checked.

·         The references should be consistent and follow the regulations required by the Journal.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer ,

Thank you for your valuable feedback on our manuscript. We have made the following revisions based on your suggestions:

1.Abstract: We have added a brief introduction to the existing challenges, particularly highlighting how global climate change and urbanization have exacerbated the health risks from compounded pollution. We have also enriched the results section, providing a clearer presentation of the research findings, especially regarding the differences in health risks across various regions and their implications for urban planning.

2.Research gap and novelty in the Introduction: We have further clarified the research gap in the introduction, emphasizing the lack of studies that comprehensively assess the combined effects of heatwaves and air pollution. We also highlighted the innovation of our study, specifically the use of the entropy weight-TOPSIS method and its advantages in assessing compounded pollution health risks.

3.Analysis in Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3: In Section 4.1, we have added more detailed analysis to explain the reasons behind the regional differences in risk, such as how population density and traffic volume contribute to higher risk levels. In Sections 4.2 and 4.3, we have provided further evidence to explain the exposure and vulnerability data, offering clear justification for the results.

4.Integration of discussion and figures: We have integrated the discussion into the results section (Section 4), improving the flow of the paper and helping readers better understand the data presented in the figures.

5.Conclusion:  We have added a conclusion section to the manuscript, summarizing the key findings and discussing the practical implications of the research for urban planning.

Once again, thank you for your detailed feedback, which has significantly improved the quality and readability of the manuscript. We look forward to your further comments.

Sincerely,

Lichen Liu

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript  can be not be published, for the following reasons:

1. In the affiliates, "China" should be "People's Republic of China".

2. English is poor. For example, in the abstract, "By integrating hazard, exposure, and vulnerability factors using the entropy weight-TOPSIS method...." is  a mistake in grammar.

3. The authors show the wrong conception. In the Line 21, what does the author mean "excessive"? The country is the "world factory", which manufactures the product and improves the life of people of the world.

3. The authors assume that "rapid urban expansion elevates the urban heat load and results in persistent high temperature weather". It is well acknowledaged that the main reason of  high temperature weather is due to the global warming, unless Xi'an is not on Earth.

4. The authors select four indicators. Are they systemic and self-consistent ？

5. No natural environmental indicator data with the same global latitude or longitude has been provided.

6. No data has been provided on the monthly or annual changes in Xi'an's indicators, especially when the city size remains unchanged.

7. No data has been provided on the changes in Xi'an indicators with the expansion of urban area.

8. The wrong model is constructed on the wrong premise, the wrong conception and the wrong indicators, which is lack of scientific independence, impartiality, and objectivity.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English is poor.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer ,

Thank you for your constructive comments on our manuscript. We have carefully addressed each of your points as follows:

1.Affiliation: We have updated "China" to "People's Republic of China" in the affiliations section.

2.Language improvement: We comprehensively checked and improved the language in the article, and re-wrote the abstract section.

3.Clarification on the cause of high temperatures: We clarified that global warming is the primary driver of persistent high-temperature weather, while rapid urban expansion exacerbates the urban heat island effect, contributing to localized increases in temperature.

4.Systematic and self-consistent indicator selection: We have added more explanation in the methods section regarding the systematic selection of the four key indicators (temperature, pollutant concentration, exposure, and vulnerability) and how they interact to provide a comprehensive framework for assessing health risks.

5.Comparison with cities at similar latitudes: In the section on the characteristics of the study area, we added a comparison of Xi'an with other cities at similar latitudes, highlighting the differences and similarities in environmental and pollution characteristics.

6.Annual data changes: We have included annual variation data for key pollution and temperature indicators in the results section, showing how these health risks have fluctuated over time.In the meantime, we can provide these raw data.

7.Impact of urban expansion: We added analysis on how urban expansion has affected pollution levels and exposure, particularly in newly developed areas, where increased industrial and traffic activity has raised the levels of health risks.

8.Independence and objectivity of the model: We clarified the theoretical foundation of the model, ensuring its scientific independence and objectivity. We also provided detailed explanations of the data sources and the transparency of the data processing steps to ensure the model’s credibility.

 

Thank you again for your insightful feedback, which has greatly enhanced the quality of the manuscript. We look forward to your further comments.

Sincerely,

Lichen Liu

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript from Dr. Zhao Jingyuan and co-workers reported on using the entropy weight-TOPSIS method to analysis of the spatial distribution of health risks in Xi’an, China. I should note that this manuscript clearly described and summarized to support the authors’ assertions.  Finally, I recommend acceptance of the manuscript after revision based on the following comments:

 

As this manuscript results offer good guidance for urban planners and policymakers to mitigate environmental hazards and promote sustainable urban growth, it is good to include for up-to-date data (e.g. up to 2022) for evaluation and discussion.

 

1.      Line 75 Figure 1: Each of the map should have a scale bar. All the words in the figure are not clear and small.

2.      Line 75 Figure 1: What is the red spot in the urban area of Xi’an city?

3.      Line 75 Figure 1: it is good to label the eleven districts in the figure (for e.g. using the number 1 to 11)

4.      Lines 92 and 93: the population data did not match with the Table.1 (line104)

5.      Line 228 table 3:the words in the column of ‘Assessment Indicator’ are not align.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer ,

Thank you for your valuable feedback on our manuscript. We have made the following revisions based on your suggestions:

1. We have added a scale bar to Figure 1 and enlarged the text.
2. The area belongs to the urban district of Xi'an. Previously, it appeared as a red dot due to resolution issues, but we have now redrawn the map.
3. We have clearly labeled the 11 districts of Xi'an in all three figures.
4. We have reviewed the population data to ensure consistency between Table 1 and the text.
5. We have corrected the table formatting to ensure proper alignment.

Once again, thank you for your detailed feedback, which has significantly improved the quality and readability of the manuscript. We look forward to your further comments.

Sincerely,

Lichen Liu

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

For the revised version, the authors addressed my concerns to this research paper. Therefore, I recommend this article being accepted as satisified with the journal requirement. Only one tip for author is that the responses to reviewer should be one by one, instead of skipping or missing comments by integrating some of them together.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your positive feedback and valuable suggestions. Based on your recommendations, we have refined our response format to address each of your comments individually without combining any of them. Below are our detailed responses to each of your comments:

1. Abstract: As per your suggestion, we have added a brief introduction to the existing problems, particularly focusing on the health risks posed by compounded pollution in the context of global climate change and urbanization. We have also enriched the results section to more comprehensively reflect our findings.

2. Introduction – Research Gap: In the Introduction, we have further clarified the research gap, emphasizing the lack of systematic assessments on the compounded effects of heatwaves and air pollution. This highlights the necessity and urgency of our research.

3. Research Novelty: We have made the novelty of our study more specific in the Introduction, particularly regarding the innovative use of the entropy weight-TOPSIS method for spatial assessment of compounded pollution health risks. We also explained how this method offers new insights into regional risk management.

4. Analysis in Section 4.1: In response to your suggestion for Section 4.1 (lines 310-313), we have added a detailed analysis to explain the reasons behind the highest and lowest relative closeness levels, such as the influence of population density and traffic volume on risk levels.

5. Evidence Support in Section 4.2: In Section 4.2, we have provided additional evidence to support the documented text, explaining the sources and basis of the data in the exposure assessment to better substantiate our findings.

6. Explanations in Section 4.3: For the descriptions of “highest” and “lowest” in Section 4.3, we have added relevant explanations to clarify the meaning behind the results and provide specific justifications, allowing readers to better understand the logic underlying these findings.

7. Integration of Discussion in Section 5: We have integrated the Discussion section into the results descriptions in Section 4, as you suggested, to enhance the reading experience by making the figure and table explanations more cohesive.

8. Conclusion: We have added a Conclusion section, summarizing our key findings and proposing future research directions and policy recommendations to further outline the practical significance of our study.

9. Language Expressions and Text Standardization: We carefully reviewed the language expressions and standardized the text throughout the paper to ensure clarity and accuracy, making adjustments to any problematic areas.

10. References: We have also ensured that the references are consistent and follow the formatting guidelines required by the journal.

Thank you again for your thorough review and insightful suggestions. These revisions have greatly improved the quality and standardization of our manuscript. We hope our revisions meet your expectations and look forward to any further feedback you may have.

Sincerely,

Lichen Liu

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript should be revised again, as the following:

1. I dont think that the rapid urbanization may threaten the sustainable development. The threaten may not exist when the urbanization is accompanied with adequate greenery, reasonable layout of buildings and roads, enough control of pollution sources, harmless treatment and renewable utilization of pollutants, artificial improvement of local natural environment, and so on.  The urban air pollution (e.g., PM2.5, PM10, O₃) and extreme climate events (e.g., heatwaves), shows these  measures were not well considered or implemented。

2. Only the rapid urbanization is the develop base of modern civilization. 

3. Because the nation is the dual structure of urban and rural areas, the rural development should be balanced.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English must be improved.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your insightful feedback. We have made the following revisions based on your valuable suggestions:

1.Impact of Rapid Urbanization on Sustainable Development: In the Abstract and Introduction, we have clarified that the challenges associated with rapid urbanization mainly arise when sustainability measures, such as greenery, thoughtful layouts, and pollution control, are not adequately implemented. We have highlighted that these issues within Xi’an underscore the need for integrated urban planning to mitigate health risks.

2.Urbanization as a Foundation of Modern Civilization: In the Introduction, we now emphasize the positive role of urbanization in advancing modern civilization, including its contributions to economic growth, technological progress, and improved living standards. This addition clarifies the foundational role of urbanization in modern development.

3.Balanced Urban-Rural Development: In the Conclusion, we have added discussions on the need for balanced development between urban and rural areas, given the dual urban-rural structure. This approach highlights the importance of reducing regional disparities to foster a more inclusive and sustainable national development framework.

Thank you again for your valuable feedback, which has greatly enhanced the clarity and depth of our manuscript. We look forward to any further feedback you may have.

Sincerely,

Lichen Liu

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Minor revising of English is required.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor revising of English is required.