Environmental Pollution Control and Sustainability Management of Slum Settlements in Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting study of a relevant topic. However, substantial revisions are needed to improve the quality of the study along with a readability of the manuscript. 

The text is very repetitive. The Introduction could be easily merged with the conceptual network section (both sections need reduction first). In a very precise and focused manner, the author should proceed from one point to another: 1) the overall relevance of the problem (how urbanization in a form of expansion of cities affects the environment, what is the role of land use change in this process). 2) then specify the relevance of studying land use changes in Indonesia and in a particular location of Makassar city (again, show the effects of rural-to-urban land use change in threatening ecosystems and sustainability). 3) demonstrate major gaps in current studies related to the topic of the paper, as well as gaps in the policies of Indonesian government and local administration in Makassar that hinder sustainable ecosystems management in the area. After that, 4) set your goal and proceed to the materials and methods section.

In the Abstract, the above scheme should be reproduced. I suggest addressing the overall relevance of the problem first, then specify the relevance of studying land-use changes in Indonesia and in a particular location. It would be good to briefly address major gaps in current studies or policies to explain the importance of the topic to a reader. I do not think it is important to demonstrate the values of any coefficients or other parameters - they are explained in the main text. In the Abstract, it is far more important to explain the link between the parameters and their effects, not the exact strengths of these links. 

The Materials and Methods section has a similar problem - it is very hard to follow the narrative due to extensive repetitions and ineffective structure. Please be very precise in this section and clearly explain the framework. It is very important for a methodology to ensure its potential reproductivity. Figure 5 must be placed at the beginning of the section and supported by a brief summary of the methods. Please clearly indicate what you do first, second, etc. Then explain each section in a focused manner. I have been lost in various kinds of analysis. 

The study includes observations, interviews, questionnaires, etc. Each of these methods must be clearly explained: what questions, how many, and so on. In the case of observation - what parameters, what scale, how they are measured. All these components are critical to the methods that are used in the study, they must be presented in a systematic way. 

Lines 144-148 should go to the Study area section. Regarding Figures 1 and 3, I do not think they are informative for a common reader, including non-Indonesians, who are not aware of the location and districts of Makassar city. I suggest replacing the figures with some kind of table to summarize the major parameters of case study districts. 

In the Results section, only those results that follow from the methodology should be presented. Section 4.1., for instance, is not a result of any methods, but a summary of statistical information on Makassar demographics. The results must be presented in a logical manner, according to the step-by-step study algorithm that the author must develop and present in the Materials and Methods. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer.

Thaks you in advance for criticism, suggestions, and recomendation for improving our article. We have made several improvement, including: Abstract, Intruduction, Material and Method, and Result.

Thanks you once again.

Regards,

Author.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I congradulate the authors for there hard work. The paper is of interest to the field of spatial studies and compatibile with the journal Land.

I would recommend the paper for publication.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for the sugestion and input regarding the inrovement of our article.

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

You are trying to address the issues of 1) How will spatial expansion, land use change, and population increase affect the development of slums in the periphery? (2) Is there a positive correlation between spatial use control, land reclamation handling, and infrastructure quality improvement with environmental quality improvement and the sustainability of slum settlement management in the suburbs of Makassar?. That is ok and interesting. However, in the current version, the length is too long and lack of logical writing. Also, there are many repeated sentences in the whole text. I suggest some methods should be as supplement. In addition, contents of slum type must be reduced intensively. Otherwise, you should point out natural differences among different types of slum and measurements for improvement environmental quality and the sustainability. As I know, location, and area of slum are not a natural features of slum. Other suggestions are below.

Title

I suggest change as ‘ Environmental Pollution Control and Sustainability Management of Slum Settlements in  Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia’

Introduction

Too much about metropolitan cities and urbanization, you should mainly focus on slum settlements in Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

I don’t think section is needed, you can integrate it into Materials and Methods section. In the current version, it is tedious.

Section 3.1 as mentioned above, you should integrate it into introduction section. In addition, L 269-271 are not clear. What is ‘heavy slums’?

Some contents of the results section should be moved into the discussion section.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for the sugestions and input regarding the inprovement of our article.

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The revisions made by the author are appreciated, but I regret to say that my recommendations have not been addressed in an effective way. 

The paper still suffers from excessive repetitions. I suggested restructuring and reducing the introduction, as well as merging it with the conceptual network section, but the recommendation was not addressed.

The abstract was not revised either.

The presentation of methodology is still too wordy and vague. It must be clearly indicated what the author does first, second, etc, step by step. 

Section 4.1. is not removed from the results despite is not a result of the study (as far as I can see from the author's framework), but a summary of statistical information on Makassar demographics.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for the suggestion and input given. We hereby convey the revised result of our article according to the direction of the reviewer, including the abstract revision, intruduction revision, methodology revision and elimenated section 4.1

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for successfully addressed my comments. Minor issues you should check carefully before publication, such as Fig 4, r23 = r13, r13=r23?

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thanks you for the suggestions and input given. We hereby convey the revised results of our article according to the direction of the reviewer.

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is now improved