Measurement and Spatio–Temporal Pattern Evolution of Urban–Rural Integration Development in the Chengdu-Chongqing Economic Circle

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presents a study on the analysis and evaluation of the degree of urban-rural integration within the Chengdu-Chongqing economic district. The focus is not on exploring the levels of development of this integration, as well as its development and spatial-temporal evolution to facilitate sustainable development at the regional level. Using a multidimensional assessment system including economic, demographic, social, environmental, and spatial dimensions, the article analyses the levels of the said integration at three-time points: 2010, 2015, and 2020. This study focuses on the Chengdu-Chongqing economic district, using counties as the basic units. An original research methodology was constructed to achieve the research objective, using the available statistical data and multi-source spatial-temporal data.  The scientific value of this research stems from the need to accelerate people-centered new urbanization, coordinate urban and rural development, and build a new international paradigm of regional development. Undoubtedly, this is an interesting study both methodologically and substantively, however, the following corrections and additions should be made to the text to enhance its quality from the point of view of the international reader: 

1) The Abstract should be revised to make it more informative. The results obtained should be synthesized and more general conclusions (both methodological and empirical) should be introduced.

2) The main aim of the research should be presented more clearly and convincingly in the Introduction.

3) The indicators selected to assess urban-rural integration should be clearly defined, described, and justified.  It is difficult to see how many of these indicators have been selected by the authors in general (there are 18 indicators in Table 1 and 13 in Table 2). Please put this issue in clear order. 

4) It is crucial that the authors clearly explain how the selected indicators relate to the assessment of the level of urban-rural integration in the individual districts. Please explain this in a way that is comprehensible to a reader who is not thoroughly familiar with the conditions of regional development in China. Only then can the research be transposed to other markets and gain international value.

5) The discussion of the research results should come before the Conclusions. In turn, the Conclusions need to be expanded so that the research results add value to knowledge at an international level. This is particularly important if the authors intend to publish their research in an international journal with a high Impact Factor.

6) It is also necessary to proofread the text on the editorial side. This is especially true of all figures (maps), which are completely illegible and must be redacted.   

Once corrections and additions have been made, I recommend the article for publication in Land. 

Author Response

Comments 1: The Abstract should be revised to make it more informative. The results obtained should be synthesized and more general conclusions (both methodological and empirical) should be introduced.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, I included the methodology of the article in the abstract and further clarified the global research value of this study at the end. Please refer to the abstract for details.

Comments 2: The main aim of the research should be presented more clearly and convincingly in the Introduction.

Response 2: Agree. At the beginning of the introduction, I briefly introduced the global research value of urban-rural integration (lines 39-41 in the introduction). At the end of the first paragraph, I directly explained the research purpose, reiterating the global research value of this study (lines 49-51).

Comments 3: The indicators selected to assess urban-rural integration should be clearly defined, described, and justified. It is difficult to see how many of these indicators have been selected by the authors in general (there are 18 indicators in Table 1 and 13 in Table 2). Please put this issue in clear order.

Response 3: Agree. The indicators in Table 1 are a probabilistic statistic based on existing research, serving as reference indicators for studying different regions. Table 2 is derived from the high-frequency indicators in Table 1, combined with the actual conditions of the Chengdu-Chongqing region, and these are the indicators used in this study. I have now clarified this point more explicitly in the article (lines 173-182 in section 2.2).

Comments 4: It is crucial that the authors clearly explain how the selected indicators relate to the assessment of the level of urban-rural integration in the individual districts. Please explain this in a way that is comprehensible to a reader who is not thoroughly familiar with the conditions of regional development in China. Only then can the research be transposed to other markets and gain international value.

Response 4: Agree. I have detailed the research significance of each indicator within the five dimensions for achieving urban-rural integrated development in the region in the article. Please refer to lines 185-209 in section 2.2 for more information.

Comments 5: The discussion of the research results should come before the Conclusions. In turn, the Conclusions need to be expanded so that the research results add value to knowledge at an international level. This is particularly important if the authors intend to publish their research in an international journal with a high Impact Factor.

Response 5: Agree. I placed the discussion before the conclusion. In the discussion, I elaborated on the similarities and differences between urban-rural integration development in the Chengdu-Chongqing region and other regions in China, and proposed specific strategies for regional development. I then expanded the summary, emphasizing the international value of this regional case study (lines 484-573 in section 5. Discussion and Conclusion).

Comments 6: It is also necessary to proofread the text on the editorial side. This is especially true of all figures (maps), which are completely illegible and must be redacted.   

Response 6: Agree.I have increased the resolution of each figure, using a resolution of 1000 dpi for all. Please review each figure. Additionally, I have submitted the original photos for each figure, which can be found in the figure collection.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

As the global prominence of the urban-rural dual structure increases, addressing the development of urban and rural areas has gradually evolved into a significant global socio-economic issue. This is especially pertinent in the context of balanced development in developing countries, which has garnered significant attention in the academia. Extensive theoretical and empirical research has been conducted around the evaluation system, spatio-temporal evolution characteristics, coupling coordination, and influencing factors of urban-rural integrated development, yielding fruitful results. However, there exists regional heterogeneity in the spatio-temporal evolution and mechanism of urban-rural integration development. Exploring the common laws of urban-rural integration based on regional experiences has become a consensus in current research. Existing studies mainly focus on the macro level, with limited work targeting the county level. Additionally, there is a lack of utilization of multi-source spatio-temporal big data in the urban-rural context.

Based on this situation, this paper selects the county-level scale of the Chengdu-Chongqing Economic Circle and comprehensively utilizes statistical data and multi-source spatio-temporal data to evaluate the multidimensional levels of urban-rural integration. Through empirical analysis, the study explores the spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of urban-rural integration and conducts an in-depth analysis of the obstacles. The integration of various data sources provides a more immediate and comprehensive perspective, while the policy recommendations proposed to address the obstructive factors are of significant practical relevance. The paper is logically clear, structurally reasonable, and its research conclusions are persuasive, making it a nice empirical analysis paper in general. It is recommended for acceptance for publication once the following issues are addressed:

1. Why does the paper use the 230-line standard deviation method, and why is this method suitable for this region?

2. Add auxiliary lines to Table 5 to enhance readability.

3. The analysis in lines 365-387 is not sufficiently in-depth; it needs to explore the differentiated reasons for the improvement in urban-rural integration development levels between central urban areas and counties.

4. The conclusion section only compares the urban-rural integration with the regions around the capital of China, with less comparative analysis of similarities and differences with other economic zones.

5. The discussion section proposes some policy recommendations, but the policy implications lack specificity and sufficient guidance.

6. Check the grammar of the entire text, simplify lengthy and complex sentences, and appropriately use active and passive voice to make the paper more fluent.

Author Response

Comments 1: Why does the paper use the 230-line standard deviation method, and why is this method suitable for this region?

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We extensively reviewed a large number of related empirical studies, noting that each region has different levels of development and uses different classification methods. Considering the data and the actual conditions of the region, the level of urban-rural integration in the Chengdu-Chongqing region is generally low, with significant differences in extreme values across the area. Therefore, from a statistical perspective, we used the standard deviation method to classify and study the natural evolution process and level differences in the Chengdu-Chongqing region over the past ten years.

Comments 2: Add auxiliary lines to Table 5 to enhance readability.

Response 2: Agree. I have made the necessary revisions. Please review Table 5.

Comments 3: The analysis in lines 365-387 is not sufficiently in-depth; it needs to explore the differentiated reasons for the improvement in urban-rural integration development levels between central urban areas and counties.

Response 3: Agree. I further expanded the analysis and found that government regional development policies are the main cause of this situation (lines 422-441).

Comments 4: The conclusion section only compares the urban-rural integration with the regions around the capital of China, with less comparative analysis of similarities and differences with other economic zones.

Response 4: Agree. I revisited the literature and analyzed studies on major urban agglomerations in China. I found that only the Capital Metropolitan Area and the Chengdu-Chongqing region exhibit similar regional differences and spatial differentiation patterns in urban-rural integration. Based on this, I further compared the similarities and differences between the two regions (lines 485-513).

Comments 5: The discussion section proposes some policy recommendations, but the policy implications lack specificity and sufficient guidance.

Response 5: Agree. I incorporated development recommendations for the Ghana region and proposed development suggestions for the Chengdu-Chongqing region and international areas using a comprehensive approach (lines 515-534).

Comments 6: Check the grammar of the entire text, simplify lengthy and complex sentences, and appropriately use active and passive voice to make the paper more fluent.

Response 6: Agree. I have repeatedly reviewed and revised the text to enhance its readability and accuracy. Please refer to the full text for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Introduction: The empirical gaps are properly identified and linked to the objectives of the paper.

The literature review section requires major revision, addressing the following aspects:

- The second paragraph of section 2.1 repeats the ideas contained in the first paragraph.

- Figure 1 is not clear. Please replace. In fact, this is a problem throughout the whole manuscript – all Figures should be replaced.

- Table 1 is included, but it is not referred in the text. The same occurs with Table 2. Actually, the same happens with all the Tables in the manuscript – they should be referred in the text and explained.

- Table 2 suffers from several problems:  unbalanced distribution of column size – the text in the first column is difficult to read; it has no lines that facilitate the relationship between each indicator and its criteria level; what is the meaning of “Positive” and “negative”?; how was the weight calculated and what is its meaning? Wrong references: “Error! Reference source not found.”

- The list of references includes relevant and updated contributions for this topic. However, the big majority of reviewed papers refer to the Chinese context. Other contributions, from diverse geographies, should be added.

Section 3:

The authors should explain better what they mean by: “In order to eliminate the effect of magnitude, the indicators were standardized for positive and negative polarity, respectively, according to their positive and negative proprieties” (lines 213-215).

 

The Conclusion and Discussion section provides a good summary of results, policy implications and indication for future research developments.

 

Author Response

Comments 1: Introduction: The empirical gaps are properly identified and linked to the objectives of the paper.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. The empirical discussion in the introduction offers a literature review of urban-rural integration research, reflecting the current status and characteristics of the focus areas in different countries and regions worldwide.

Comments 2:  The second paragraph of section 2.1 repeats the ideas contained in the first paragraph.

Response 2: Agree. I further elaborated on this by providing a concise definition of urban-rural integration in the first paragraph of section 2.1.

Comments 3:  Figure 1 is not clear. Please replace. In fact, this is a problem throughout the whole manuscript – all Figures should be replaced.

Agree. I have increased the resolution of each figure to 1000 dpi for clarity. Additionally, I have submitted the original photos for each figure, which can be found in the figure collection.

Comments 4: Table 1 is included, but it is not referred in the text. The same occurs with Table 2. Actually, the same happens with all the Tables in the manuscript – they should be referred in the text and explained.

Response 4: Agree. The indicators in Table 1 are based on a probabilistic analysis of existing research, serving as reference indicators for studying different regions. Table 2 is derived from the high-frequency indicators in Table 1, combined with the actual conditions of the Chengdu-Chongqing region, and these are the indicators used in this study. I have now clarified this point more explicitly in the article (lines 173-182 in section 2.2). Furthermore, I have provided a detailed explanation of the research significance of each indicator within the five dimensions for achieving urban-rural integrated development in the region. Please refer to lines 156-209 in section 2.2 for more information.

Comments 5: Table 2 suffers from several problems:  unbalanced distribution of column size – the text in the first column is difficult to read; it has no lines that facilitate the relationship between each indicator and its criteria level; what is the meaning of “Positive” and “negative”?; how was the weight calculated and what is its meaning? Wrong references: “Error! Reference source not found.”

Response 5: Agree. I have reformatted Table 2 and added auxiliary lines to enhance readability. The positive and negative significances correspond to the value sizes of the indicators and their implications for regional urban-rural integration, which I have explained in the text (lines 180-182). The calculation of weights is detailed in section 3.3, "Data Processing and Research Methods," where the indicator weights are used to calculate the comprehensive urban-rural development level for the corresponding regions. Please refer to lines 262-271 for more details.

Comments 6: The list of references includes relevant and updated contributions for this topic. However, the big majority of reviewed papers refer to the Chinese context. Other contributions, from diverse geographies, should be added.

Response 6: Agree. As discussed in the introduction, there is a relative lack of empirical research on urban-rural integration development globally, while China has conducted more extensive research in this field. This study focuses on the Chengdu-Chongqing region in China, so we have primarily referenced Chinese regional studies. In considering research from developing countries, we have appropriately added references, including references 38-40, and conducted a comparative analysis with the development of the Ghana region.

Comments 7: The authors should explain better what they mean by: “In order to eliminate the effect of magnitude, the indicators were standardized for positive and negative polarity, respectively, according to their positive and negative proprieties” (lines 213-215).

Response 7: To eliminate the differences in units among various indicators and facilitate comparison between them, we refer to the positive and negative attributes of each indicator as outlined in Table 2.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx