Land Cover Changes in the Rural Border Region of Serbia Affected by Demographic Dynamics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

After reviewing the manuscript, I am submitting comments/feedback on the content below:
- In Chapter 2, I would suggest adding some statistical data on demographic changes in Serbia (maybe also broken down by urban and rural). The authors write at the beginning of this chapter about changes in Europe (citing statistics in doing so), and there is no statistical data on the situation in Serbia (e.g., birth rate, migration balance).
Chapter 3.2
- I think it would be a better idea to present the indicators used with tables or from dashes. It would also be worthwhile to justify the selection of indicators. It would also be worthwhile for the authors to clearly define the indicators (to make them understandable to readers). I also have a question for one of them: how do the authors define the highly educated population? The indicator is expressed in %. Is it then the share of highly educated population in the total population?

Results
- This chapter should be numbered 4, not 3.
- The authors use a simple statistical method such as Pearson's correlation coefficient. Was the correlation analysis preceded by statistical verification, e.g., the authors calculated the coefficient of variation to remove simple characteristics with low variability (e.g., less than 10%) from the set of indicators. If not, it is worth considering conducting it.
- to enrich the results, I encourage the use of basic statistical measures, for example, in the first subsection of the results. I mean the arithmetic mean, maximum value, minimum value, spread, coefficient of variation, coefficient of asymmetry, median, standard deviation. It is also worth comparing the average results for the analyzed areas with the average for the country. 
- It would be worthwhile for the authors to consider adding a data matrix in the second subsection of the results. Unfortunately, Table 2, which is included in this subsection, does not contain much information. A better solution would be to show the correlation matrix between the selected indicators.

Results subsection 3.3.
- It may be worthwhile to present the matched indicators in this section on maps as well,
- if the data in Table 3 relate to the analyzed areas then the title of the table should be clarified.
- It is worth comparing these indicators with the average values for the country. The current description is quite poor.
- here I also encourage the use of basic statistical measures to increase the quality of this part of the manuscript.

Results subsection 3.4.
- it is worthwhile to write briefly at the beginning of this subsection what was done in it, because in the methodology, the steps of the procedure were not described in detail by the authors,

Discussion
- due to the fact that in the results the authors did not make any comparisons of the results, did not refer to the scientific literature the discussion should be very rich and lively. Unfortunately, this part should be refined. I encourage the authors to do a more extensive review of the international literature in this section. It is worth comparing the demographic changes of border areas in Serbia with demographic changes in other countries. In the introduction, the authors wrote that demographic changes (population decline) bring spatial benefits. This element is also worth referring to in the discussion. 

Conclusions
- in view of the fact that the conducted research is quite simple, it would be worthwhile for the authors to propose the next stage of research in this area. 

Literature
The authors have made a rich review of the scientific literature, which is worth appreciating. A weakness of the review is the small percentage of publications by authors from outside Serbia. The problem analyzed is global and has been widely discussed in the international literature. 

In general, I think the idea for the study is very good, because the authors analyze demographic changes in juxtaposition with “spatial changes.” In my opinion, this is a very interesting and important juxtaposition. I encourage the authors to continue working on this manuscript and to continue/develop research in this area (e.g., not only in the context of border areas).

Author Response

Reply to the evaluation by the REVIEWER 1

 

„In Chapter 2, I would suggest adding some statistical data on demographic changes in Serbia (maybe also broken down by urban and rural). The authors write at the beginning of this chapter about changes in Europe (citing statistics in doing so), and there is no statistical data on the situation in Serbia (e.g., birth rate, migration balance).“

RESPONSE:

Yes, we added suggested statistical data as 4th paragraph in Chapter 2 and marked with red color font.

“I think it would be a better idea to present the indicators used with tables or from dashes. It would also be worthwhile to justify the selection of indicators. It would also be worthwhile for the authors to clearly define the indicators (to make them understandable to readers). I also have a question for one of them: how do the authors define the highly educated population? The indicator is expressed in %. Is it then the share of highly educated population in the total population?”


RESPONSE:

Thank you for suggestion. We did changes according to your idea.

“- The authors use a simple statistical method such as Pearson's correlation coefficient. Was the correlation analysis preceded by statistical verification, e.g., the authors calculated the coefficient of variation to remove simple characteristics with low variability (e.g., less than 10%) from the set of indicators. If not, it is worth considering conducting it.
- to enrich the results, I encourage the use of basic statistical measures, for example, in the first subsection of the results. I mean the arithmetic mean, maximum value, minimum value, spread, coefficient of variation, coefficient of asymmetry, median, standard deviation. It is also worth comparing the average results for the analyzed areas with the average for the country. 
- It would be worthwhile for the authors to consider adding a data matrix in the second subsection of the results. Unfortunately, Table 2, which is included in this subsection, does not contain much information. A better solution would be to show the correlation matrix between the selected indicators.”

 

RESPONSE:

Thank you for constructive suggestions. We consider to conduct statistical verification, but it this case we will excluded important parameters. The point was to show also what demographic parameters did not have correlation with each other and with different categories of land use. We inserted the data with recommended statistical measures (in the context of spread we use interval of variations, while in context od coefficient of asymmetry we use coefficient of skewness).  Also, we make comparison of choosen values of indicators with the country average. In the context of Table 2, we added in appendix the correlation matrices for the 2002, 2011, and 2022 year.

 

“- if the data in Table 3 relate to the analyzed areas then the title of the table should be clarified.
- It is worth comparing these indicators with the average values for the country. The current description is quite poor.
- here I also encourage the use of basic statistical measures to increase the quality of this part of the manuscript.”

RESPONSE:

Thank you for comment. We changed the title of the table (“Land Use Categories for Serbia rural border areas and Index of Change 1990–2018”). Also, we compared values the change index of land use categories on the rural border area with the national level.

“it is worthwhile to write briefly at the beginning of this subsection what was done in it, because in the methodology, the steps of the procedure were not described in detail by the authors”

RESPONSE:

We have added a paragraph about was done in subchapter 4.4.

- due to the fact that in the results the authors did not make any comparisons of the results, did not refer to the scientific literature the discussion should be very rich and lively. Unfortunately, this part should be refined. I encourage the authors to do a more extensive review of the international literature in this section. It is worth comparing the demographic changes of border areas in Serbia with demographic changes in other countries. In the introduction, the authors wrote that demographic changes (population decline) bring spatial benefits. This element is also worth referring to in the discussion.”           

RESPONSE:

Thank you, the Discussion chapter has now been expanded and improved in a way that the results are linked to the results of works outside Serbia as well as other works from Serbia.

“- in view of the fact that the conducted research is quite simple, it would be worthwhile for the authors to propose the next stage of research in this area. “

RESPONSE:

We expanded Conclusion with proposal for next stage and further research.

“The authors have made a rich review of the scientific literature, which is worth appreciating. A weakness of the review is the small percentage of publications by authors from outside Serbia. The problem analyzed is global and has been widely discussed in the international literature. “

RESPONSE:

The literature review and discussion chapters are now enriched with publications outside from Serbia. More than 80 References added to the Reference list.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper addresses an important issue in an understudied region of the world and it can be of interest to readers of Land. However, I find some major problems with the manuscript as it stands:

• Throughout the paper, the authors make assertions without providing appropriate examples and references. The paper would benefit from a broader engagement with the literature on forest transitions and demographic change from across the globe, and even the region.
• There are problems with clarity across the paper with many terms lacking proper definition, and use of vague phrases. I recommend that the authors revise the manuscript with a lens for precision and clarity.
• In the same vein, the authors use a lot of adjectives like "negative", " underdeveloped", " undesirable" to describe the phenomena they are documenting without going in depth as to why. I would encourage more rigor in reporting findings and thinking about the problems at hand, and providing the evidence to support their claims if they stick with them. I think the paper would make a much stronger case if more rigorous and precise language was used to describe the phenomena observed.
• The paper is centered around the correlations between population indicators and land use change. But the processes that link those dimensions are not explained in detail. The discussion should draw more from the literature (in the absence of mixed-methods) to better articulate those processes for the reader and in the context.
• The analysis of demographic indicators receives much more attention both in the methods and the results. Much more needs to be explained about what was done from the land use change perspective. Land use change maps with corresponding legends matching the classes used for analysis should be added to the results for the available and relevant time period.
• The authors mention policy efforts that they consider inadequate but they provide no concrete examples. Given the main recommendations are centered around policy interventions, I encourage them to better articulate the current and desired policies. Similarly, I would encourage them to integrate ideas about how policy-makers should engage with local populations to debate around these problems so that interventions are not top-down and blind to local residents perspectives about their reality and aspirations for the future.
• More detailed comments are in the attached manuscript.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reply to the evaluation by the REVIEWER 2

 

Some of the responses were answered directly in the text (marked in purple) and others in the form of comments in the accompanying letter.

 

INTRODUCTION

 

„Vague, please be more specific about the practical implications“

Response:

Practical implications are presented in Chapter 6 after the analyzed results and discussion.

 

„And agriculture? Infrastructure“

Response:

No, there are no agencies for agriculture and infrastructre but government ministries.

 

LITERATURE REVIEW

 

„Citations“

„citations for each“

Response:

Citations are in the next parahraph. Marked and commented sentence is just a brief for the next paragraph.

„citations“

Response:

Citations for older publications now added and for the new one starts from the next parahraph.

 

„I think this merits some further unpacking in terms of processes and implications“

Response:

Yes, it was analyzed in the further chapters, especially in the discussion.

„References? It could be argued that in certain contexts, depopulation has been coupled with shifts in productions systems that have led to sustained or even increased agricultural production (land concentration, mechanization, etc.). As we know, the effects of the Green Revolution are not necessarily positive, but the relationship between population and productivity is not linear...“

Response:

Yes, there is a citations just after this sentence and we changed that sentence. Thank you for suggestion but here it was not about productivity but more forest regeneration and environmental benefits in rural areas.

 

„References? If you mention multiple countries, you should give examples and provide the references. You should also detail the processes through which market liberalization operates to reduce the competitiveness of local products.“

Response:

Yes, we added references. Regarding details about market liberalization we think that is outside of primary goal of our paper and it can be subject of some further research.

„What does tourism and organic agriculture have to do with energy and biodiversity conservation? The link between these two sentences is not clear. Are these subsidies aimed at mitigating or adapting to climate change? Please be more specific“

Response:

Yes, that sentence was unneccessary and we deleted it

 

STUDY ARE AND METHODS

„How are rural and urban areas defined/distinguisehd in this context?“

Response:

Rural and urban areas are defined by official settlements methodology of Statistical office of Republic of Serbia.

 

„It would be important to provide figures comparing it to the rest of Serbia, and to other rural or border regions.“

Response:

Data comparison is given in the same paragraph, just few sentences further. If you mean to compare this rural border region with other countries border regions it was not in focus of our article and it can result a very broad study since some countries have very long border line.

 

 „also place in the map (e.g. major cities, etc.). Make the map more informative for people who are unfamiliar with the region“

Response:

There is a map (Figure 1) in further part of the same chapter.

 

„this is unclear“

Response:

Yes, it was, so we delted unnecessary part.

 

„?“

Response:

The explanation is given in the next sentence. Uniqueness is about multiethnic population in border regions.

 

" You talk a lot about development in the paper but you are not clear about what you mean or focus on. Which are the key indicators that you rely on to make these comparisons and assessments?“

 

Response:

Thank you, we changed this sentence to make it more clear.

 

„The map is hard to read and could have more information. Make sure to indicate in the legend what the borders correspond to (municipalities?). Maybe use different types of lines to distinguish municipalities form countries. See more comment in the text about potential additions to the map.“

 

Response:

We manage to change map according your and other reviewers suggestions.

 

„from which entity?“

 

Response:

Guidelines are from Copernicus Land Monitoring Service program. We added that in the sentence now.

„Did you use all 44 cover classes to evaluate land use. I think some more detail about how you approached the spatial aspects is needed. Was the scale of analysis the municipality?“

Response:

No, we used only classes which actualy are in those municipalities. The scale is municipality and that’s described in the first sentence of Methodology chapter

 

„You tend to use language that describes things as positive or negative without explaining why. I would suggest that you use more descriptive and " neutral" language (like increase or decrease...).“

Response:

Thanks for the suggestion. We corrected that sentence and other similar in the text.

RESULTS

„Please explain how these indicators are constructed in the methods“

 

Response:

Those indicators have been explained in part of 4 paragraph in 3.2 Chapter. „Using the Pearson correlation coefficient, these 14 demographic indicators were examined in pairwise combinations (“each with each”), resulting in 91 correlation coefficients. The values of these coefficients are presented in the Results chapter. „

 

„Isn't natural population growth only dependent on births and deaths? Please clarify...“

Response:

Yes, that was mistake. We changed sentence.

 

„explain“

Response:

Yes, we provided a new sentence with a better explanation.

 

„It would be helpful to see how they compare to the rest of the country, or the national average“

 

Response:

Yes, we provided a new data to make easy comparison with national data.

 

„Please add to this interpretation. It is not clear why you are calculating these correlations.“

 

Response:

Thank you, we added interpretation.

„explain/clarify“

Response:

Sentences are now rewriten to be more clear.

 

„Clarify... in terms of population numbers?“

Response:

Sentence is now rewriten to be more clear.

 

„This is an interpretation“

„Idem. Seems like you know/assume the answer to the question you are trying to answer.“

Response:

Yes, we removed that sentece since there is a similar at the end of Results chapter.

„Without the maps, it is a bit hard to make the relation with you previous results about population“

Response: 

The problem is that the changes on these maps are very difficult to see, since they are fragments of the surface that have changed, and the size of the map does not favor these changes. That is why we thought of avoiding their display on the maps and leaving only the table.

„How id this calculated? Please explain in methods“

Response:

Yes, thanks, we added the sentence to the Methodolgy chapter: The index of change was calculated by dividing the land cover area in 2018 by its corresponding area in 1990 and multiplying the result by 100, where values above 100 indicate an increase and values below 100 indicate a decrease

 

„I still do not understand which are the cover classes that you are basing your analysis on.“

Response:

Cover classes have been mentioned in the Table 3 and in the sentences before that table.

 

„How about changes in land use in these area?“

Response:

Land use changes are mentioned in the same sentence.

„The contrast is not clear to me, the tendencies seem to go in the same direction per what you describe“

Response:

Yes, we explained that contrast in a new, rewritten sentence.

 

„you don't really analyze these relationships. Either explain better or leave out.“

Response:

Yes, we provided explanation in depth.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Since other reviewer had suggestions also, we rewritten discussion entirely and answered on you comments.

 

Practical Implications for Development Strategy and Policymakers

 

„the generation of renewable energy? Or who is using in this case?“

RESPONSE:

Yes, we changed in „generation“.

 

„This section of the paper is very interesting. However, you do not provide much texture int he description of the study site other than descriptive statistics. It would be important to bring more of the regions culture and potential to focus.“

 

RESPONSE:

Thank you. More about regions culture and potentials have been given in re-written Dicussion chapter.

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

„The cause and effect has not been established“

RESPONSE:
Results of the study

„You do not explain how in the paper“

RESPONSE:
Now, as you suggested it is explained in the Results chapter.

„I think an assessment of the impacts of land abandonment and reforestation should come before assuming that it is negative all around. I agree that rural regions deserve investment, and aging and depopulation can be problematic... but the problem needs to be clearly established before thinking about solutions. Here you only establish a correlation between depopulation and land use change... your study does not dive into the impacts of these coupled phenomena on the environment and people's lives. I would point in that direction as well as highlighting the potential the region has for diverse economic activities that could attract families to live and make a living in the area.“

 

RESPONSE:

Yes, true, changes doesnt need to be negative at all. We have added explanation in Conclusion.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript tackles an issue very much present in various European countries. As such, the analysis made by the authors is interesting, especially cleating up the situation the the Eastern Europe. I have only some comments and suggestions:

1) It would be useful to know the impact of the economic, social and political situation of the neighboring countries to the situation of the rural border areas. There´s really no mention of this.

2) As the manuscript mentions the topography as one of the important factors impacting the rural border areas, it would be useful to have topographic map to understand better Serbian land formation.

3) Also a map of the remaining agricultural production would be useful as well as that of the mentioned "vegetation succession".

Author Response

Reply to the evaluation by the REVIEWER 3

 

“It would be useful to know the impact of the economic, social and political situation of the neighboring countries to the situation of the rural border areas. There´s really no mention of this”

RESPONSE:

Yes, we have added comparison of neighboring countries in Discussion chapter.

As the manuscript mentions the topography as one of the important factors impacting the rural border areas, it would be useful to have topographic map to understand better Serbian land formation.

RESPONSE:

Thank you, we have added topographic map in the Methodology chapter.

Also a map of the remaining agricultural production would be useful as well as that of the mentioned "vegetation succession"."

RESPONSE:

The problem is that the changes on these maps are very difficult to see, since they are fragments of the surface that have changed, and the size of the map does not favor these changes. That is why we thought of avoiding their display on the maps and leaving only the table.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is devoted to a significant problem for border rural areas - how demographic processes affect land use.
The article examines the relationship between depopulation and land use change through a quantitative analysis of demographic trends in rural border areas of Serbia. The article is properly structured and from a formal point of view - the goal is achieved.
The methodological tools suggest the use of a mixed approach, combining spatial analysis and statistical methods. The methods used are also briefly presented.
The "Results" section presents demographic trends in rural border areas (Figures 2,3,4 and Table 1).
When finalizing the article, I suggest that the authors add the following paragraphs:
1. Table 2 contains information about the Results of the Correlation Matrix for Demographic and Synthetic Indicators. In practice, the changes in the 91 correlation coefficients for the period under study are shown in 10 groups in a synthesized form. The analysis is not clear enough. What does it mean that the presented summarized coefficients have increased (or decreased)?
2. To Table 4. Correlation between changes in land use and demographic changes - the full name of the indicators PNCI, HHCI, SPH should be added........
It is also unclear what indicators were used for the industry and transport sectors.
3. The discussion is related to the results, but it concerns a significantly broader issue. The results of the study can contribute to a very small extent to "Practical implications for development strategy makers and policymakers". The main question is whether the results of the correlation analysis alone are sufficient for such conclusions and guidelines?

Author Response

Reply to the evaluation by the REVIEWER 4

 

“Table 2 contains information about the Results of the Correlation Matrix for Demographic and Synthetic Indicators. In practice, the changes in the 91 correlation coefficients for the period under study are shown in 10 groups in a synthesized form. The analysis is not clear enough. What does it mean that the presented summarized coefficients have increased (or decreased)?”

RESPONSE:

We did changes and rewritten paragraph 3 in chapter 4.2. to be more clear.

“To Table 4. Correlation between changes in land use and demographic changes - the full name of the indicators PNCI, HHCI, SPH should be added........”

RESPONSE:

Yes, thank you, we added full name of indicators.

“It is also unclear what indicators were used for the industry and transport sectors.”

RESPONSE:
The full name of those land cover classes (indicators) are “industry areas” and “transport infrastructure”

“The discussion is related to the results, but it concerns a significantly broader issue. The results of the study can contribute to a very small extent to "Practical implications for development strategy makers and policymakers". The main question is whether the results of the correlation analysis alone are sufficient for such conclusions and guidelines?"

RESPONSE:

Discussion chapter is now fully changed. We added explanation as a last paragraph to the chapter Practical implications for development strategy makers and policymakers.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents a study on land cover changes in the rural border region of Serbia affected by demographic dynamics.

Abstract: This section cover all the necessary information. Yet, it is presented in such a way that it is not exactly clear what period is covered by the study as at the beginning the authors refer to the changes in the period 2002-2018 and then state that they used “national population censuses and the CORINE Land Cover datasets for 1990 and 2018”.

Introduction: This section presents the study background. The authors also described their study objectives and its relevance to science and policy.

Literature Review: This section presents a wide range of former studies related to different aspects of the studied topic.

Study Area and Methods: This section is divided into sub-sections. In the first sub-section the authors described the case study area. In the second sub-section methodology and data are shown. In this sub-section the authors did not explain why the land cover data from CORINE covers different years than the analysed demographic data. The methods were correctly chosen.

Results: This section is divided into sub-sections. First sub-section presents demographic trends in the rural border area. Second sub-section shows correlation matrix results for demographic and synthetic indicators. Third sub-section demonstrate land use change. The final sub-section presents correlation between land use changes and demographic dynamics. The results are clearly presented and are compelling. I suggest adding at the end of this section a paragraph summarizing the research results.

Discussion: This section is based on the study findings. The results are analysed in detailed and compared with similar studies.

Practical Implications for Development Strategy and Policymakers: This section summarizes practical aspects of the study findings and fully shows the added value of the study.

Conclusions: This section is based on the study findings. It also show the future study needs. I suggest adding information on the study’s limitations.

Author Response

Reply to the evaluation by the REVIEWER 5

 

We thank the reviewer for their detailed and thoughtful comments, which helped us refine the structure and clarity of the manuscript. In response, we clarified the timeframes used for demographic and land cover data, added a summary paragraph at the end of the Results section, and included a note on study limitations in the Conclusion to strengthen the overall coherence and transparency of the paper.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I do not have any comments.