Chinese Coastal Fishing Ports Classification Based on Remote Sensing Images

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study explored the classification of Chinese coastal fishing ports using satellite remote sensing images. There are some suggestions as the following:

1. This study lacked detail informaiton of satellite remote sensing used in this ms, such as spatiotemporal resolution, data time, sensors, and so on.

2. Methods used in this study lacked quantitative analysis and relevant reference basis. And the model need significance test, also. Therefore, I have difficulties evaluating the results because of inadequacy of data analysis.

Author Response

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

"Chinese Coastal Fishing Ports Classification Based on Remote Sensing Images" provides a clear and concise overview of the study's objectives, methods, key results and conclusions. It highlights the novel contribution of constructing a fishing port classification system using remote sensing images. The abstract is well-written and effectively conveys the essence of the research.

The introduction provides relevant background information on the importance of fishing ports in China and globally. It identifies the research gap in using spatial distributional characterization and classification systems for improved fishing port management. The authors make a compelling case for why a scientific classification system is needed to modernize management and support sustainable coastal zone development. The introduction cites appropriate literature to frame the study context and objectives. 

Provide more specific details on how a classification system will benefit fishery organizations, coastal zone planning, and global fishery development. What are some concrete examples of how it could be applied?

Discuss in more detail the limitations of existing fishing port classification approaches that solely use grade categorization and service evaluation. Why are these insufficient?

The objectives could be stated more explicitly at the end of the introduction. Specifically mention that the study aims to 1) Develop a fishing port classification index based on remote sensing data and 2) Analyze the spatial distribution characteristics of different fishing port types.

The materials and methods section provides sufficient detail to understand how the study was conducted. The research setting, data sources, and classification process are clearly described. 

Provide more specifics on the remote sensing images used (e.g. spatial resolution, spectral bands, dates acquired). Cite the data sources

The fishing port type identification system in Figure 2 is informative. However, more justification is needed for the specific distance, area, and water system thresholds used. How were these criteria selected?

Consider adding a flowchart figure to visually represent the overall methodology and analysis workflow.

The results are well-organized by the five identified fishing port types. The use of tables and figures effectively supports the written descriptions. Specific examples are provided for each port type which strengthens the findings. The spatial distribution patterns and characteristics of the different port types are adequately summarized. Some areas for improvement:

The figures would benefit from higher resolution images, especially for the inset maps. Some features and text are difficult to discern.

Provide the percentage breakdown of central vs first-class ports for all five types in the text, not just a few (e.g. what percent of gulf and island types are central ports?)

Include more quantitative results where possible, such as the average distance from shore or water area for each port type. This would help substantiate the classification criteria.

Proofread for grammatical errors and awkward phrasing. 

The discussion contextualizes the significance of the study's findings and compares them to previous research. The authors discuss how a fishing port classification system can guide coastal zone management, fishery development, and port cluster planning. The limitations of the current study are also appropriately acknowledged. Suggestions for improvement:

Provide more discussion of how this spatial classification approach compares to and improves upon existing non-spatial classification systems. What are the key advantages?

Reflect more on the policy implications of this research for coastal resilience and sustainable development planning. How might a scientific classification system inform decision-making?

The discussion of port clusters and networks at the end seems tangential. Consider removing or connecting it more explicitly to fishing port classification.

The conclusions summarize the main research findings and the novelty of the spatial classification approach. The key takeaways regarding the distribution of different port types and their relationship to natural resources and conditions are clearly stated.

Overall, this is a well-conceived and executed study that makes a novel contribution to fishing port classification research. The spatial approach using remote sensing data enables a more comprehensive understanding of port characteristics and distribution. With some minor revisions to elaborate on the methodology and strengthen the discussion, this paper merits publication in Land. The graphical and quantitative results in particular are a valuable addition to the literature.

My overall recommendation is to accept this paper pending minor revisions. The authors should be commended for their innovative approach and clear presentation of results.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This study is primarily a methodological piece that nevertheless presents some interesting data about the locations and characteristics of Chinese ports, developing a classification system based on distance from the seacoast.  The authors come up with five classes of fishing ports (as opposed to container or shipping ports): inland, estuary, shoreline, gulf, and island ports.  They argue that this classification system will aid in locating and managing fishing ports in the future in ways that contribute to sustainability.  While I agree that the classification system is quite clear and perhaps useful, I was less convinced by the suggestion that this classification system will guide port management without additional information about how the ports vary in other ways besides distance.  There is some information related to access to fishing resources, port interaction with transportation systems and urban populations, seafood, etc., but little information about relationships that might exist between port types and, say, vessel sizes and gears, types of seafood landed, markets targets or subsistence goals met, and other features that would truly make this classification system more helpful in planning and management.

That said, this seems to me as valuable an article as ethnographic work that relies, say, on Guttman’s scaling or a similar method to characterize the sizes and complexity of rural villages (this is just an example that came to mind).  That is to say, I find this to be somewhat limited but nevertheless informative ethnography.  Although I am not familiar with port classification, there are already classification systems available that differentiate between ports based on features similar to those I listed above: volume of fish landed, number of vessels, and services, dividing them up into three classes.  I have difficulty understanding how this system is superior, but I begin to see inklings of superiority when they discuss things like fisheries resources (especially in relation to estuarine ports) and linkages to cities and other infrastructure.  Giving more details like these on a class-by-class basis would certainly improve the method and the article.  The focus on the three variables of distance from a seacoast, hydrological conditions (which I take to mean proximity to a river), and location are fine as far as they go but do not go far enough to assist with port management. 

Finally, as a personal exercise, I attempted to apply this to ports in my own backyard and found that I could come up with fishing ports that conformed to each of the classes but, again, when I was finished with this exercise, I didn’t believe that I was any better prepared to manage each type of port.  There is some value in being able to apply the method elsewhere.

Overall, the quality is quite good.  But there are a couple of sentences without verbs.  These kinds of mistakes could have been made by an English speaker.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form.