Spatiotemporal Analysis of Land Use Patterns on Carbon Emissions in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a very nice paper, which I believe is read for publication subject to a couple of rather minor points
- The authors should give the paper a final read mostly focusing on cosmetic snd formatting issues.
- I would like to see the policy implications in the end a little bit more developed and detailed.
These are naturally rather marginal concerns.
Author Response
1.The authors should give the paper a final read mostly focusing on cosmetic and formatting issues.
Response: Thank you so much for your suggestions! The whole manuscript is revised according to the format of the journal. Please see the version with changes.
2.I would like to see the policy implications in the end a little bit more developed and detailed.These are naturally rather marginal concerns.
Response: That is a very nice suggestion and we have added more policy implications in the end. Please see the part 5. Conclusions and Policy Implications. Thank you so much for your kindness.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
A very interesting paper. I suggest the authors to add something about the period after 2016. It is not well explained. Why the period 2006-2016? I suggest extending this period for making it more significant from a statistical point of view. If not possible, explain why. I would not include in the title this period if it does not have a specific importance. Can the data be extrapolated to the next decade? The research seems too limited to this decade and the interest for reading can affect the citation in the future. I wish you success!
Author Response
A very interesting paper. I suggest the authors to add something about the period after 2016. It is not well explained. Why the period 2006-2016? I suggest extending this period for making it more significant from a statistical point of view. If not possible, explain why. I would not include in the title this period if it does not have a specific importance. Can the data be extrapolated to the next decade? The research seems too limited to this decade and the interest for reading can affect the citation in the future. I wish you success!
Response:Thank you so much for your kind suggestion! It is really so helpful and we are so grateful for it. According to your suggestion, we have excluded the time in the title since it does not have a specific importance. And it is not easy to obtain the relevant data and do the analysis about the period after 2016 since we have to revise and submit the manuscript before the deadline 29th Jan. Thank you so much for your consideration. And the whole manuscript is double checked, please see the revised version with changes. As for the next decade, we are considering that maybe it can be concluded in the next paper. Thanks again for your kindness!
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper calculates the carbon emission intensity and the carbon emissions per capita of land use in 30 provinces at the national level in China from 2006 to 2016. Overall, the research of this paper is interesting. But please do the below revisions:
- Please read and revise the paper based on the journal template. The reference should be cited as [1], [2]… not (Bryan et al., 2020). Please follow: References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including citations in tables and legends) and listed individually at the end of the manuscript.
- Please read/revise through the whole paper for the grammar issues. I listed some for example:
- Line 123: spatiotemporal, but Line 125: spatial-temporal. Please be consistent using spatiotemporal.
- Line 139: (Sun et al. 2015)
- For the units, for example, in the main text, you used tons, but in Figure 1, you used t. Please be consistent.
- A number of superscript issues such as 5688.391 × 104, should be 104
- The carbon sink value in Figure 1 is very small, right? It cannot be seen. Please try to redo this figure such as changing the Y axis.
Author Response
This paper calculates the carbon emission intensity and the carbon emissions per capita of land use in 30 provinces at the national level in China from 2006 to 2016. Overall, the research of this paper is interesting. But please do the below revisions:
Please read and revise the paper based on the journal template. The reference should be cited as [1], [2]… not (Bryan et al., 2020). Please follow: References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including citations in tables and legends) and listed individually at the end of the manuscript.
Response: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion! The whole manuscript is revised according to the format of the journal. Please see the revised version and the version with changes.
Please read/revise through the whole paper for the grammar issues. I listed some for example:
Line 123: spatiotemporal, but Line 125: spatial-temporal. Please be consistent using spatiotemporal.
Response: Thank you so much for your kind suggestion! We are so sorry about those mistakes due our carelessness. We have checked the manuscript carefully. Those grammar mistakes you mention have corrected. Please see the revised version with changes. Sorry again and thanks so much for your kindness.
Line 139: (Sun et al. 2015)
For the units, for example, in the main text, you used tons, but in Figure 1, you used t. Please be consistent.
A number of superscript issues such as 5688.391 × 104, should be 104
The carbon sink value in Figure 1 is very small, right? It cannot be seen. Please try to redo this figure such as changing the Y axis.
Response: Thank you so much for this suggestion. Figure 1 is redone. Please see it in the manuscript. Thank you so much!
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
