Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is very appropriate nowadays and responds to one of the main concerns of society, which is to make cities more livable. In my opinion, the equity and accessibility parameters studied give an adequate general idea at the global city scale, but the idea of ​​accessibility should also be studied at the neighborhood scale, since it is at this proximity scale that accessibility takes on a role. more real sense. Pedestrian access to green spaces for the elderly, the disabled or children is key to a real integration of these natural spaces into the daily life of citizens. The results of this work are very relevant on an urban scale, but one must be careful before applying them literally on a neighborhood scale. In proximity, the journeys on foot have other variables that must be incorporated into a detailed analysis such as slope or environment of the journey from home to the green space or perception of security.

-        Introduction appropriate

-        For all map figures: the maps are not easy to understand and it would help to have an accompanying fragment on a larger scale to understand what is said

-        Some legend texts are absolutely illegible, they must be increased, some of them are only in Chinese, they must be translated, the district names on the map must be visible all over the article

-        line 111: the text in figure 1 (b) is illegible. It must be explained the situation of the six studied districts

-        line 117: the first time the acronym OSM is mentioned, its meaning must be said Open Street Map

-        Line 139:  the significance of the acronym OLI (Operational Lan Imager) must be said the first time it appears

-        Line 140:  the significance of the acronym HSV (Hue, Saturation, Value) must be said the first time it appears

-        Line 155: the graphic scale should also be in international system units

-        Line 198: Figure 6 is illegible; units must be said. It would help if the districts are drawn on the map

-        Line 201: the units of the average length must be said, all over the paragraph

-        Line 206: must said “highest number of roads” instead of “highest roads”

-        Line 228: table 2, the list in category 3 repeats paddy fields

-        Line 229: figure 7 please write legend in English, increase the text size and add international system for units in the graphic scale

-        Line 282: the variable d_j must be d_i 

-        Line 254: figure 8 please write legend in English, increase the text size and add international system for units in the graphic scale.

-        Line 294: figure 10 please write legend in English in order to understand the previous paragraph, and add international system for units in the graphic scale

-        Line 390, 391 and 392: a part of the sentence is repetitive, please revise.

-        Line 456, 458: please increase the text size of the legend

-        Line 496: figure 14 must be translated into English in order to understand it.

-        Line 505: please clear what does GIS mean in this case, a software (ArcGIS) or the concept (Geographic Information System).

-        Line 508: legends in the four maps are illegible, please increase

-        Line 566: legends in the four maps are illegible, please increase

-        Line 591: the full stop at the end of the Line must be removed and The must be the

-        Line 612: legend text must be translated into English

-        Line: 657: Fragststs must be replaced with Fragstats

-        Line 694: what does the word Institute refers to in this context?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Please introduce the context of your city studied. What kind of town is it, what is its history , what are specifics that influence it‘s green space.

also please use the green space typologies in your analysis. What kind of green spaces are we talking about that are probed for accessibility? Parks, forests, green streets, pocket parks? What is publicly accessible? Which are maintained and which are maybe too wild to use? 

i see a combination of data Maps run through a Series of analytics with in particular space syntax accessibility studies combined with satellite image analysis. For me as a landscape architect there is no valuable result. 

if I would compare it to medicine : you combined a measure (let’s say sugar concentration) with a network analysis (let’s say blood vessels) … but what can you say about that specific patient if you don’t mention or study his specific physical condition in a greater context. 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The purpose of this research is to establish an assessment framework for the equity and accessibility of urban green spaces in the context of Fuzhou, China. The authors employed space syntax and GIS technology to create the study model. I believe that the front-end of the paper is comprehensive and well-written, but I think it could benefit from a bit more clarity.

Introduction

It consists of a brief explanation of the background of the study, a brief statement of the problem, and a review of the literature. I would like to see the main issues of the study, and the knowledge gap. What is the current situation in the body of knowledge in terms of accessibility to urban green spaces?

Further clarification of the key concepts of the study is also required in this section.

The literature on the topic is not comprehensive.

Materials and Methods

In terms of the research method, the authors mostly provide details about the procedure, which is beneficial for readers to understand and be able to repeat the study. However, my concern is regarding the validity and reliability of the study procedures. In what ways can the authors make sure that the method used in the study is the most appropriate and valid one?

In terms of census data, I am wondering if data on the population of ages between 15 and 65 are available.

Lines 117-118: it should be “spatial syntax model” instead of “spatial sentence model”.

Under “space syntax Integration” section, the authors have reported the average street segment length in each district of the study area (Table 1). However, they did not interpret the output. You need to interpret clearly and explain the reasons why these values are important.

Line 201: The authors mentioned that “The average length of the study (Table 1) is 265.10 ….” Which doesn’t make sense. Please check.

What was the purpose of running t-tests? What kind of t-test did the authors run? Independent samples t-test or paired sample t-tests? Clarify. Provide justifications for not being significant in any of t-tests.

Overall, the method section is poorly organised and difficult to follow in some places. The author/s have mentioned a lot of (related/non related) justifications in order to conduct the study. I would like to see a more organized method section.

Conclusions

The conclusion is a tad light on findings and implications. What do your results mean for theory? for policy? for future research? As it stands, this discussion section does not make clear the present study’s exact contribution to the literature. In the earlier part, the authors claimed that this study will develop a framework for the equity and accessibility of urban green spaces. Where is the framework? How you can compare the study results with precedent studies?

Further comments:

The authors need to proofread the paper as there are numerous grammatical errors and incomplete sentences that need to be addressed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks for editing. I think it is sufficient for publication now.

Author Response

Thank you for acknowledging the changes we have made.

Reviewer 3 Report

I am happy with most of the changes the authors made to the manuscript. I can see improvements in the revised manuscript. However, I still have a number of suggestions to improve the ms.:

In terms of the research method, I’m not talking about resource files here. As I mentioned earlier, my concern refers to the validity and reliability of the study procedures. The study method cannot be created/developed by the researchers in such studies. It must be based on the literature. So in what ways can the authors make sure that the method used in the study is the most appropriate and valid one?

In terms of census data, I am wondering if data on the population of ages between 15 and 65 are available. I would like to see a strong justification for such measurements.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx