The Relationship between Spatial Behavior and External Spatial Elements in Ancient Villages Based on GPS-GIS: A Case Study of Huangshan Hinterland, China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe topic of the paper is very interesting, addressing the relationship between spatial behaviour and external space in traditional Chinese villages. Although the findings are valuable, I wish the authors would pay more attention to the following aspects:
Introduction: It is too long and it lacks structure and coherence, being very difficult to follow. Further comments are directly on the text.
Literature review is very short (there are only 15 references) and quite general. Why is this topic relevant? What is the research gap?
Research methods. Case selection. I think this subsection must be strengthtened.
Lines 231-235 – in only 4 lines, you mention Yixian County, Huangshan City and Huizhou. For the international reader, who is not familiar with the Chinese administrative units, it might be a bit puzzing to properly locate them when reading the paper, as you offer no information about the province. Then, you state that ‚Xidi and Hongcun were included in the World Cultural Heritage List in 2000’ but you choose for the current study other 3 villages ‚because the spatial forms of these villages have been preserved and the tra-ditional way of life of the inhabitants has been continued unaltered’. The two villages included in the World Heritage List should also have the same characteristics, as it is compulsory in order to be listed. So, why mention these villages if you do not include them? Why not choose one of them and another two that are not included on this list?
More information on these villages and their characteristics (natural setting, demographics, main economic activities, connectivity) etc. should also be provided, so as to create the context of the study area.
3.3. Villagers spatial behavior data collection
Fig. 1 is placed out of context, as nowhere in the paragraphs above has there been any mention about the process of drawing space elements diagrams.
How were the 130 villagers chosen? Did they volunteer? Did they have any benefit? What age group do they belong to? How many men and how many women? Are they all farmers? Moreover, the authors should clearly state that they gave the GPS devices to the villagers as we can only guess that was the case and what type of devices they used.
Conclusions are not strong enough, they mainly present general ideas. It should focus on the novel findings of your study.
Further comments are provided directly on the manuscript. Please see attached.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Moderate revision of the English language is required. Some of the sentences are quite long and the meaning is difficult to understand.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper is an interesting read. The topic investigated is relevant not only for China but for any developing country where villages still preserve a certain authenticity while confronting (the need for) rapid development and adaptation to new lifestyles and socio-economic frameworks. We also recommend considering this extended discussion and highlighting useful insights and implications. Also, we believe that the paper needs a little bit more explanation of the framing and limits of the discussion.
As for focused observations and recommendations, please, consider the following.
1. Sometimes the line of arguments is not so clear. For instance
- pag. 2, lines 57-59
- pag. 4 - lines 170-173
2. Analysis of the long-term evolution of the Chinese rural areas is quite generally presented. As in any other communist country, in China were implemented plans for forced development to eradicate the "gap" between rural and urban life. However, no specific aspect is presented in this paper, such as how these policies actually transformed rural space in China. In other communist countries, for instance, in many instances, the return to authentic villages is problematic due to too much destruction of urbanism and lifestyle, changes in demographics, and even mentalities... We feel that for a clear framework, more discussions are needed on this line.
It is not very clear what is designated by "new rural villages". Also, it is not very clear if the paper discusses these new villages, ancient villages or both.
3. The paper claims that "not only fails to meet the inhabitants’ space features and spatial behavior". Some arguments should be provided, what are these specific needs not met? Also consider if some of these ancient facilities are needed today, when many villagers are not farmers anymore.... A more nuanced discussion should be considered.
4. The literature review is brief but relevant. Nevertheless, we consider a as needed a discussion of the new lines of urbanism that valorize the authenticity of places and try to accommodate traditional approaches into modern lifestyles.
Additionally, having a table synthesizing the specific traditional components of the Chinese village spaces, stressing the ones not considered in the "new villages", would be relevant.
Also, stressing the benefits of these approaches would be interesting.
5. The methodology is well-designed and generally well-explained. We would need a few more details on the sample and how relevant are the villagers investigated throughout the study.
6. The discussions should also consider the limits of the study/methodology used. Also, conclusions could stress more the implications, both in case of ancient and new villages.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. In the introduction, it is recommended to provide a bullet-point summary and list the potential marginal contributions of this paper.
2. Recognize that the behavioral habits of villagers are an important factor in shaping the spatial characteristics of ancient villages. In order to enhance the depth of the analysis, it is recommended to add a section on policy recommendations in the conclusion to describe the policy recommendations based on the research results and how this study provides a reference for China's global experience.
3. It is recommended to clarify the research limitations and significance of this article at the end of the article.
4. The article contains grammatical problems and inaccurate descriptions, indicating the need for professional proofreading. Careful proofreading of this article is recommended to address these issues.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe article contains grammatical issues and inaccurate descriptions, indicating the need for professional proofreading. Careful proofreading of this article is recommended to address these issues.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper addresses a compelling and pertinent topic from both scientific and planning perspectives. However, it suffers from several shortcomings that render it unsuitable for publication in its current form:
Lack of International Perspective: While focusing on planning issues specific to China, the paper neglects the international context of the subject matter. References predominantly originate from Chinese authors, and there's a notable absence of consideration for global approaches to rural village development.
Unclear Contribution: It remains ambiguous what unique contribution the paper offers to a wider scientific audience. Does it propose an innovative methodology for supporting planning and design endeavors in Chinese rural villages? What is this innovative methodology? Or does it aim to accomplish something else?
Limited Content Scope: Presently, the paper predominantly revolves around describing the spatial behavior of rural village inhabitants. Although this information holds interest, it falls short of providing the depth required for publication in a reputable international journal. To improve the paper, before reconsidering it for publication, the authors are advised to:
- Provide more emphasis on its potential implications for current and future planning strategies in China.
- Sharpen the focus on the topic of planning challenges in Chinese rural villages, which currently remains confined to subsection 5.3. Within this subsection, the mention of the Mao Tian Xin Village case study lacks elaboration on the spatial design process and the rationale behind the selection of specific spatial elements.
- Consider actively involving local communities in the design process, which could serve as a thematic cornerstone to enhance the paper's appeal and relevance.
By addressing these points, the paper could significantly enhance its quality and appeal to a broader audience.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe paper needs a general revision of the language style to improve its clarity and readibility.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper has improved significantly, I congratulate the authors on their work.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageSome editing is required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
the benefits from the review process are evident. The paper, in its current configuration, shows a more robust structure and clearly states its objectives and its contribution to a broader scientific audience. Further efforts can be devoted to better contextualize the paper in the international debate about rural planning (the debate is still too limited).
Furthermore, the current limits and future perspectives of the research can be better discussed (not limiting the discussion to a bullet point).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
