Spatial Transformation of a New City in 2006–2020: Perspectives on the Spatial Dynamics, Environmental Quality Degradation, and Socio—Economic Sustainability of Local Communities in Makassar City, Indonesia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is interesting, it studies current affairs and is very well worked. The authors have done a great job to achieve their goals. However, and understanding that there is no word limit in Land, I think it is very long: 57 pages with single spacing is excessive for a scientific article. Sometimes it is difficult to follow their arguments because too many topics are covered. I understand that summarizing it now is very complicated, so I advise its publication with a series of corrections.

GENERAL:

- Whenever possible, increase the cartography. Many processes can be demonstrated with maps. Maps demonstrate processes and map data. For exampleo, although there is a map, there are more possibilities in the changes of land use in section 4.1.

- The introduction is fine, but it is very long, like the whole manuscript. A part of the introduction can be part of the theoretical framework.

- The three objectives are not easy to understand, especially the second. They seem very repetitive and unclear. Page 5.

- In the functions of space (page 7), next to Lefebvre's references, make reference to space justice / injustice (E. Soja)

- Separate case study (territory) from methodology. The methodology must be in a separate section.

- Methodology: “surveys and in-depth interviews”. You have to specify more. The authors speak of sources, but it is not explained how the data are exploited or interrelated to obtain results and demonstrate hypotheses.

- Give more information about: “The quantitative instrument in this study was a questionnaire”. That is, explain the number of people, the universe, how and with what criteria those people were selected, etc.

- Conclusions: they are very small (less than a page) for such a long text. Make some reference to experiences of urban planning in the city.

SPECIFIC:

- ASEAN acronyms (page 2). At your first mention, write the extended meaning.

- Writing errors in lines: 411 (new city areaof); 809 (city areaof Metro Tanjung); 1171 (city areaof Metro Tanjung); 1419 (city areaof), 1538 (areaof Metro Tanjung Bunga); 1372 (Field data show that the differences in the transportation modes of transportation); 1543 (sufficient skills, skills, or educational background); 1561 (Thi is exacerbated); 1601 (with the production of capitalism on the one side and the mode of production of capitalism on the other); 1814 (in the capacity of adaptation and the capacity of this adaptation to highlight weak mastery); 1907 (there is a relationship between the spatial transformation of changes in social formation and the changes in social formation 1908 related to changes in social interaction and social adaptation, as well as the consequences of changes at the local community level of the new city area of Metro Tanjung Bunga).

- Table 2, with coordinates, is not necessary. Better a map with the location and territory of the sub-districts.

- Figure 4: poor quality of photos.

- Figure 5: a map has no scale.

- Figure 6: write the legend with the colors of the graph.

- Figures 8, 10 and 11: the sources are only your own and from google maps? Not an official source?

- Figure 10a: write the legend.

- Line 1427: “The residential segregation in the new city area of Metro Tanjung Bunga is shown in Figure 13 below”. There are indices and other methods to study segregation.

- Figures 14, 15, table 5, etc: write the real source, and not Primary Date.

- Table 6: write the source.

- Figures 16 and 17: write the source.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for corrections and suggestion for improving our article. We need to saya that we have substantially improved a number of things. Hopefully, the result of these improvements have met the expectations oh the reviewer. Thank you for all the suggestion and input that have been given.

Regards,

Author 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I think this paper is very qualified to be presented and even to be included in the scientific journal. The authors provide a very accurate data and examples in the paper. The provision of pictures in this study are also very supportive because with the pictures, the study will be more alive. I also think that the data that they gave in this research is very good and very capable. It's just that I still feel something is missing in the paper of "Conclusion". I want them to deepen a little more in what they are doing. For the pages, I think it's to much. The readers will feel bored with the many pages. I think it will be great if you could compress the pages to at least 35 pages. I understand that pictures take up a lot of pages but it is even better if you only take pictures that are highly relevant to the research you are doing.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for correction and suggestions for improving our article. We need to say that we have substantialy improved a number of things. Hopefully, the results of these improvement have met the expectations of the reviewer. We have tried to reduce the number of pages from 57 to 45 pages. Thanks you for all the suggestions and input that have been given.

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf