Spatial Analysis on the Service Coverage of Emergency Facilities for Fire Disaster Risk in an Urban Area Using a Web Scraping Method: A Case Study of Chiang Rai City, Thailand

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript titled "Spatial Analysis on Service Coverage of Emergency Facilities for Fire Disaster Risk in Urban Area using Web Scraping Method" to Urban Science. I have carefully reviewed your paper and would like to provide the following suggestions to improve its clarity, structure, and overall quality:

English: The manuscript requires additional effort to improve the English language and grammar to ensure that the content is clear and professional.

Structure: Consider reorganizing the structure of your manuscript for better coherence:

Combine Introduction and Literature Review: These sections can be merged to form a cohesive background section that provides context and highlights the importance of your study.

Tables 1 and 2 and Case Study: These should be moved to the Methods section, where they will align more appropriately with the description of the research approach.

Limitations and Discussion: The limitations of the study should be discussed within the Discussion section to provide a balanced interpretation of your findings.

Conclusion: It is recommended that the Conclusion be the final section of your manuscript, summarizing the key findings and their implications.

Content Specificity: Does the term "DPMCs" (Disaster Preparedness and Management Centers) include fire services? Since the title of the manuscript specifically mentions fire, it is important to ensure that fire services are explicitly included and discussed.

Acronyms: Make sure that all acronyms are spelled out in full the first time they are used, with the acronym provided in parentheses. Use the acronym consistently in subsequent mentions.

Citation Format: Avoid using reference numbers as the subject of sentences. Instead, consider using the authors' names or other pronouns when referring to previous studies.

Source of References: Tables and figures should clearly indicate the source of the data or references used.

Software Information: When mentioning specific software tools (e.g., QGIS), it is advisable to include the official website or a reference for each tool to assist readers.

References: Consider adding more references to support the proposed methods and to strengthen the literature foundation of your study.

Best regards,

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Poor

Author Response

Comments 1: English: The manuscript requires additional effort to improve the English language and grammar to ensure that the content is clear and professional.
Response 1: This manuscript has been rechecked content structure by authors, and it has been proofread by native English speaker before submitting a final revision of manuscript.

Comments 2: Structure: Consider reorganizing the structure of your manuscript for better coherence:
Response 2: This manuscript has been rechecked content structure by authors, to make it more simplify and meaningful.

Comments 3: Combine Introduction and Literature Review: These sections can be merged to form a cohesive background section that provides context and highlights the importance of your study.
Response 3: Agree, Authors have considered to combine Introduction and literature review into "Background" section - Combine Introduction and Literature review together then rewrite into a single narrative but preserve the exiting studies literature review information. - Pg.1-5 line 26-189.

Comments 4: Tables 1 and 2 and Case Study: These should be moved to the Methods section, where they will align more appropriately with the description of the research approach.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. However, after consulting with all the co-authors, it was agreed that Tables 1 and 2 should be placed in the background section, as this section deals with past research with similar objectives and different methods of obtaining results, as well as basic knowledge on measuring emergency response effectiveness with a focus on time. This section will discuss the necessary basic data sets and sources for use in the methodology section for measuring emergency response effectiveness.

Comments 5: Limitations and Discussion: The limitations of the study should be discussed within the Discussion section to provide a balanced interpretation of your findings.
Response 5: Agree, Authors have considered to rewrite conclusion and combine limitation into discussion section. - Pg.13-14 line 418-499.

Comments 6: Conclusion: It is recommended that the Conclusion be the final section of your manuscript, summarizing the key findings and their implications.
Response 6: Agree, Authors have considered to the Conclusion as the final section. - Pg.13-14 line 482-499.

Comments 7: Content Specificity: Does the term "DPMCs" (Disaster Preparedness and Management Centers) include fire services? Since the title of the manuscript specifically mentions fire, it is important to ensure that fire services are explicitly included and discussed.
Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have added more information to clarify DPMCs: There are 9 disaster prevention and mitigation centers (DPMCs) equipped with a full range of emergency response equipment and machinery for all levels of disasters such as fire, flood, and chemical disaster. DMPCs are also responsible for coordinating disaster response and mitigation efforts. - Pg.9 Line 304-309.

Comments 8: Acronyms: Make sure that all acronyms are spelled out in full the first time they are used, with the acronym provided in parentheses. Use the acronym consistently in subsequent mentions.
Response 8: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have rechecked all Acronyms and make sure consistency when using them in the article.

Comments 9: Citation Format: Avoid using reference numbers as the subject of sentences. Instead, consider using the authors' names or other pronouns when referring to previous studies.
Response 9: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have change reference number as the subject of sentences to name of the previous authors and put the reference number at the end of the sentences. 1.For example, Seong et al. (2023) conducted a study on heat-related EMS delays in Austin-Travis County, employing spatiotemporal analysis to examine EMS response time delays [15]. Banke-Thomas et al. (2024) assessed emergency obstetric care accessibility in Lagos, Nigeria, using geographical coverage indicators estimation and integration of traffic variability [16]. --2.Rani et al. (2023) applied a hierarchical integrated spatial risk assessment model to identify fire hazard areas in an Indian study area, highlighting the need for coping mechanisms and a Fire Information System [20]. - 1. Line 100-105 2. 115-117.

Comments 10: Source of References: Tables and figures should clearly indicate the source of the data or references used.
Response 10: Thank you for pointing this out. Table 1 and 2 are presents previous studies to support background of this study both method and cut-off time factors, all references are already present in the tables. while table 3 and 4 are the study's result, they are no need for any references. All figures in the article are generated by this article's authors using QGIS application (reference to QGIS is optional as QGIS's developer announcement), and map was based on Google map and OpenStreetMap. However, authors have put the references to data sources as accreditation for those developers are displayed at the corner of every figures.

Comments 11: Software Information: When mentioning specific software tools (e.g., QGIS), it is advisable to include the official website or a reference for each tool to assist readers.
Response 11: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have put in the specific software and tools website in references section, and in-text references as QGIS as [33] and ORS as [34].

Comments 12: References: Consider adding more references to support the proposed methods and to strengthen the literature foundation of your study.
Response 12: Agree. Authors have put more references to the article. To support the study, that it specifically focuses on using emergency response time as a measure of effectiveness within emergency response agencies. The researchers supplement the literature with references to emergency response studies that emphasize emergency response time as the crucial means to reduce the loss of life and property. this is presented in section "1.2.1. Emergency response cut-off parameters ", first paragraph with 5 more references [7-11] supporting the using or time as crucial factor measuring effectiveness of emergency response. - Pg.2 line 78-89.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A well-developed work, however, attention must be paid to the details, for example, on line 86, table 2 is cited when referring to table 1 on line 120.

It is suggested that the entire document be reviewed to review these types of details.

in which I only made the observation that the citations of figures and tables in the text had to be corrected, I considered that the relevant approach was important and that it was well written with simple direct language without ruminations without ideas that remained unfinished , with good quality figures.

And the only element it had was the one already mentioned.

Hence my report that it could be published with minor corrections (the numbering of figures and paintings).

Although the methodology is not new, it is an example of applied research important for the design of strategies and policies in the prevention and management of accidents and disasters.

I apologize in advance if I only said what in my opinion was necessary for the publication of this article.

That there are other indications, of course, worse, they are not within the scope of the aforementioned article.

 

Author Response

Comments 1: A well-developed work, however, attention must be paid to the details, for example, on line 86, table 2 is cited when referring to table 1 on line 120. It is suggested that the entire document be reviewed to review these types of details.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have rechecked all figure and table references- switch between Table 1 and Table 2 references - Pg.2 line 92 and Pg.3 line 109.

Comments 2: in which I only made the observation that the citations of figures and tables in the text had to be corrected, I considered that the relevant approach was important and that it was well written with simple direct language without ruminations without ideas that remained unfinished, with good quality figures. And the only element it had was the one already mentioned.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have rechecked all figure and table resolutions - put in OpenStreetMap or Google map in the map figures, depends on which map data source has been used to generate each figure. All figures are generated by the article's authors using QGIS and map day from both OpenStreetMap or Google map - Figure 2,3,4, and 6.

Comments 3: Although the methodology is not new, it is an example of applied research important for the design of strategies and policies in the prevention and management of accidents and disasters.
Response 3: Thank you. Authors will consider to improvement the future study with more detail and contribution.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Compared with the available literature, what are the theoretical contributions and application values of this study? It is suggested to enhance the corresponding discussions in the conclusion part.

2.  The scientific question of this article is not clear. This type of work has been extensively carried out in different regions. The contribution of the author in theory and methodology in this article should be clearly stated in the introduction, discussion, and conclusion sections.

3. Suggest adding a subtitle to this article: Taking Chiang Rai City, Thailand as an Example.

4. It is suggested to supplement the technical roadmap or methodology diagram studied in this article, so that readers can clearly grasp the research ideas.

5. The Travel Time mentioned in the article seems to be only a theoretical time, without considering the actual conditions of the road, such as road grade, road surface condition, traffic flow, etc.

6. It is more appropriate to place the Suggestions of Findings and Proposed Strategies in the discussion section.

7. The conclusion and discussion should be separated, with a focus on in-depth analysis of the findings in this article and addressing scientific issues.

8. This article lacks innovation, and the research results need to be compared with similar studies by other scholars.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

Comments 1: Compared with the available literature, what are the theoretical contributions and application values of this study? It is suggested to enhance the corresponding discussions in the conclusion part.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have considered to emphasize more on the article's contribution. That it's demonstration of how spatial analysis, real-time facilities data, and simple web data scraping tools can be integrated to assess and improve emergency service coverage for fire disasters in urban areas with small budget. By applying this methodology to Chiang Rai city, the study offers valuable fundamental insights for urban planners and policymakers, highlighting the importance of strategic resource allocation and coverage in disaster management. This work may provide a practical, replicable approach that enhances public safety and urban resilience. This main contribution has been added in Background, discussion, and conclusion section.

Comments 2: The scientific question of this article is not clear. This type of work has been extensively carried out in different regions. The contribution of the author in theory and methodology in this article should be clearly stated in the introduction, discussion, and conclusion sections.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have considered to emphasize with more clarity on the scientific question, gaps and aims and contribution of the study. They have been added and enhance in every part of the manuscript, especially in the background, introduction, conclusion, and discussion.

Comments 3: Suggest adding a subtitle to this article: Taking Chiang Rai City, Thailand as an Example.
Response 3: Agree. Authors have added “a case of Chiang Rai City, Thailand” to the title. “Spatial Analysis on Service Coverage of Emergency Facilities for Fire Disaster Risk in Urban Area using Web Scraping Method: a case of Chiang Rai City, Thailand”, to make it emphasize more specific to the area of study.

Comments 4: It is suggested to supplement the technical roadmap or methodology diagram studied in this article, so that readers can clearly grasp the research ideas.
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. Authors have considered to add methodology roadmap in a methodology section. - page 6 line 203.

Comments 5: The Travel Time mentioned in the article seems to be only a theoretical time, without considering the actual conditions of the road, such as road grade, road surface condition, traffic flow, etc.
Response 5: Agree and Thank you for pointing this out. In this article, authors have specifically focused on using emergency response time as a measure of effectiveness within emergency response agencies. The researchers supplement the literature with references to emergency response studies that emphasize emergency response time as the crucial means to reduce the loss of life and property. However, other factors affecting emergency response time, such as road physical conditions and traffic conditions, are not considered. The authors have planned to conduct further studies on these related factors and optimization technique in the future work.

Comments 6: It is more appropriate to place the Suggestions of Findings and Proposed Strategies in the discussion section.
Response 6: Agree, Authors have considered to move "Implications of Findings and Proposed Strategies" to discussion section. - Pg.14 line 453-488.

Comments 7: The conclusion and discussion should be separated, with a focus on in-depth analysis of the findings in this article and addressing scientific issues.
Response 7: Agree, Authors have considered to separate conclusion and discussion, focusing on finding to address the study issue in the area. - Pg. 12-14.

Comments 8: This article lacks innovation, and the research results need to be compared with similar studies by other scholars.
Response 8: Agree, and Thank you for pointing this out. This study may not be considered an innovation, but it is the researcher's intention to study and analyze specific spatial data that has not been studied in terms of fire emergency response efficiency before, using existing methods and tools that are easy to use, to be able to assess the initial efficiency and lead to more detailed and complex research studies in the future. In addition, other researchers in other areas can easily follow these steps.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Accept in present form

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Fair

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 The revision has addressed my concerns.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language is required.