Research on the Equity of Urban Green Park Space Layout Based on Ga2SFCA Optimization Method—Taking the Core Area of Beijing as an Example

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The presented research on the availability of green public spaces represents a significant contribution to the issues of improving the overall quality of life in cities. The article meets all the attributes of high quality. It has clearly formulated goals and methods for achieving them. The research reflects the latest scientific knowledge in the field of green infrastructure planning in cities.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In my opinion, overall, the structural framework as an academic paper was demonstrated sufficiently. And the purpose and methodology of the paper were clearly stated; however, I would like to make some observations as follows.

Introduction

·       In the last part of Chapter 1.3, ‘Among them, the Two-step Floating Catchment Area Method (2SFCA_ and its optimization method are widely used in the field of equity evaluation due to their wide applicability and high accuracy.’, please add sources.

Materials and Methods

·       In the 3rd paragraph of Chapter 2.2.1, ‘therefore, a buffer zone was established with a radius of 3km…’

·       Please elaborate reasons for the 3km buffer along with the reference cited.

·       The table 1 does not contain significant implications for research. Please consider alternatives or delete.

·       Please describe the specific method for the Chapter 2.2.3. Please elaborate ‘passing speeds were assigned according to different travel modes.’. Provide more details on the process assigned to the five categories of roads, comprehensive information, and forms of passing speed data.

Results

·       The Chapter 3.1 and 3.2 are more methodological, so I recommend shift them to chapter 2 materials and methods.

·       In the description below line 251 in chapter 3.2, the authors mention two ways; Class and equity level. The tables and figures that appear later are presented based on Class I-VI, however, I recommend that these be reconstructed based on the equity level. It’s more intuitive, also the purpose and results of the research focus on equity (ex. the paragraphs below Figure5).

·       Table 2- change the location of class and equity level 

·       Table 3 and 4 – total and rewrite according to the equity level.

·       Figure 5,6 and 7 – I recommend symbols in gradation in order ‘equitable’, ‘relative equitable’, ‘relative inequitable’, and ‘seriously inequitable’.

Discussion

·       The Chapter 4.1 contains a lot of information that should be presented in the result. It’s simply a description of the region according to level. In addition, a typo ‘Core Are’ correction in the first line of the last paragraph is required.

Conclusion

·       The Chapter 5 would rather be in the Discussion section?

·       Also, more improvements are required. Please provide additional maps or illustrations of the parks’ characteristics introduced in the 3rd paragraph (Belt parks mainly include~~) of chapter 5.1.

·       The research presents each effective strategy according to the scale (face, belt, and patch-shaped) of urban park. Please add descriptions about the districts (e.g., Shichahai) which significantly differ the result between 10min-car-journey and walking 30min. it would be more effective linked to strategies based on scale.

Research outlook

·       The Chapter 6 corresponds to the conclusion. Please change and add a summary of the overall study at the beginning.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of the article is interesting. Although the intent of the work is good, the manuscript needs a revamping to elevate its quality and international readership/significance. Most references in this paper are from China. Land is an international journal and aims to publish papers with high quality that are interests of international readers. I suggest that the authors review Literature Review, presenting other cases where the topic has already been treated and applied in an international context.

The innovation of the article should be presented to the introduction.

The abstract must be improved. Must have the detailed objectives of this study.

The organization of the article needs to be revised. For example, in the results chapter, the Calculation Process is presented, which must be transferred to the Methods.

It makes no sense to put Figure 4. The diagram of Gaussan function diagram is common knowledge.

Sub-chapter 3.3 must not start with a table. There must be a framing text.

In tables 3 and 4 the percentage values must have two decimal places.

References – the bibliographic references are not correct. All authors must be indicated and not only the first author followed by et al. For example: Lin Y; Wan N; Sheets S, et al. - Line 578)

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I find that this newer version has been improved.