Study on Spatial and Temporal Differences of Water Resource Sustainable Development and Its Influencing Factors in the Yellow River Basin, China
Jaroslav Rožnovský
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is interesting for the audience of the journal.
There are issues need to be addressed.
1) Similarity % obtained from Turnitin is 29%. Out of it, 7% is from a single source. Second highest is 4%, from another single source.
6% AI generated says Turnitin. I don't know what it means, but if clicked, it returns a * stating that low rates are miss-cought.
However, similarity % is high and from single sources being high. Similarity should be reduced below 15%.
2) The water variables are used as being calculated per 10 000 Yuan. Why not per capita? Per 10 000 Yuan, if this variable decreases, as Yuan amount increases with GDP, this does not mean efficiency and sustainability for water resources. Robustness analysis is needed in the empirical section with this respect by using different water variables as substitutes.
3) Introduction does not well state the contribution and novelty of the paper which should be discussed more.
4) Literature review is missing in terms of recent literature. Literature should be augmented.
5) Discussion with recent existent literature with empirics.
6) Limitations and future directions to be extended.
7) Environmental sustainability, climate change, melting of ice caps should be discussed in introduction and conclusion. Not enough arguments are developed with this respect.
Minor issues exist. Typos and Grammar. Reading by a native is needed.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: Similarity % obtained from Turnitin is 29%. Out of it, 7% is from a single source. Second highest is 4%, from another single source.
6% AI generated says Turnitin. I don't know what it means, but if clicked, it returns a * stating that low rates are miss-cought.
However, similarity % is high and from single sources being high. Similarity should be reduced below 15%.
Response 1: Thank you for your suggestions. Originality in academic work is a paramount scholarly ethic. While this paper drew methodological and conceptual inspiration from other articles, all aspects of the research, from data collection to data processing and result analysis, are entirely original. To demonstrate the originality of our work, we will provide you with the complete data processing workflow. Regarding the slightly elevated similarity score, I believe it may stem from methodological similarities between our paper and others in the field. However, we have made adjustments to address this issue. The analysis and writing of the paper were carried out manually and were not generated by AI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Point 2: The water variables are used as being calculated per 10 000 Yuan. Why not per capita? Per 10 000 Yuan, if this variable decreases, as Yuan amount increases with GDP, this does not mean efficiency and sustainability for water resources. Robustness analysis is needed in the empirical section with this respect by using different water variables as substitutes.
Response 2: Thank you for your suggestion. We greatly value your advice, and in response, we have added Section 3.4 to assess the robustness of our research results. The findings indicate that the WRCC index fluctuations are generally within 5%, demonstrating the stability of the results..(Lines 439-457)
Point 3: Introduction does not well state the contribution and novelty of the paper which should be discussed more.
Response 3: Thank you for your suggestion. In fact, the last paragraph of the introduction serves as the innovation point and contribution of the paper. (Lines:141-158)
Point 4: Literature review is missing in terms of recent literature. Literature should be augmented.
Response 4: Thank you for your feedback. We have reevaluated our reference materials and have incorporated or replaced a set of the most recent research findings.
Point 5: Discussion with recent existent literature with empirics.
Response 5: Yes, providing an overview of current research progress is indeed crucial as it helps establish the research background and highlight the paper's novelty. In fact, our introduction section encompasses the current state of research and includes a literature review. (Lines 84-140)
Point 6: Limitations and future directions to be extended.
Response 6: Thank you for your feedback. This suggestion is highly valuable, and in response, we have restructured the conclusion section. We have added Section 5.3 to discuss the limitations of the paper and provide recommendations for future research. (Lines: 563-586)
Point 7: Environmental sustainability, climate change, melting of ice caps should be discussed in introduction and conclusion. Not enough arguments are developed with this respect.
Response 7: Thank you for your feedback. Indeed, these aspects are essential for sustainable development and will be the focus of our future research endeavors. This paper is constrained by its length and cannot cover all aspects comprehensively, which is why we chose to concentrate on quantifying the study using 25 selected indicators. In our next steps, we will further delve into these areas and aim to publish a series of research outcomes.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Knowledge of ongoing climate change requires comprehensive studies of the water cycle at all scales, from macroclimate to microclimate. In this direction, the presented article is a contribution to understanding the dynamics of the capacity of water resources in connection with environmental protection measures. The chosen methodology is rational and the results achieved are beneficial for knowledge and possible measures in the evaluated provinces. The necessary addition, i.e. expansion, requires a conclusion that is formulated without a deeper explanation of the partial proposals for measures. Develop more individual recommendations and specify these for provinces.
Author Response
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: Knowledge of ongoing climate change requires comprehensive studies of the water cycle at all scales, from macroclimate to microclimate. In this direction, the presented article is a contribution to understanding the dynamics of the capacity of water resources in connection with environmental protection measures. The chosen methodology is rational and the results achieved are beneficial for knowledge and possible measures in the evaluated provinces. The necessary addition, i.e. expansion, requires a conclusion that is formulated without a deeper explanation of the partial proposals for measures. Develop more individual recommendations and specify these for provinces.
Response 1: Thank you for your feedback. We have added Section 5.2, which provides strategies and recommendations for enhancing the water resources carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin from perspectives such as industrial structure, pollution control, technological advancement, and water resources management. (Lines 563-586)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have done a good work but they can improve figures 1, 3 and 4 by marking some major locations. Also some important references are missing which are correlated with this domain.
Minor revision in English is required.
Author Response
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: The authors have done a good work but they can improve figures 1, 3 and 4 by marking some major locations. Also some important references are missing which are correlated with this domain.
Response 1: Thank you for your feedback. We have reworked Figure 1 by labeling the names of the provinces, which will enhance the readability. Additionally, we have reorganized the references section, incorporating some of the most recent and significant papers. (Lines 263)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
1. Is water resource sustainable development equal to water resource carrying capacity?
2. Since 2013, P value is not remarkable, is spatial analysis method suitable to this paper?
some spell error
Author Response
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: Is water resource sustainable development equal to water resource carrying capacity?
Response 1: Water resources carrying capacity is an essential indicator used to assess the ability of a specific region to sustain its water resource supply over a certain period. On the other hand, water resources sustainable development primarily focuses on the long-term preservation and management of water resources to meet present and future needs, including societal, economic, and environmental demands. In my paper, the primary focus is on evaluating the water resources carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin. However, the paper takes an approach from the perspective of sustainable development to analyze water resources carrying capacity. Therefore, the paper's approach considers water resources carrying capacity as an integral component of sustainable development, rather than equating it with sustainable development itself.
Point 2: Since 2013, P value is not remarkable, is spatial analysis method suitable to this paper?
Response 2: Thank you for your clarification. In fact, the paper provides a clear explanation of this. Firstly, at the global level, since 2011, the Moran's I index has a P-value greater than 0.1, and Z-value less than 1.6, indicating that the spatial distribution of WRCC in the Yellow River Basin during this period exhibits randomness. Secondly, the global Moran's I index for WRCC sub-indicators is shown in Table 6, and it demonstrates that most sub-indicators during the study period exhibit spatial correlations.
In summary, a non-significant P-value suggests a lack of spatial correlation, whereas a significant P-value indicates spatial correlation, which warrants further analysis of spatial clustering patterns.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
This manuscript conducted a comprehensive analysis of the spatial and temporal variations of water resource carrying capacity and its influencing factors in the significant Yellow River Basin, China. It will be an interesting work for Sustainability reader. But it should be noticed that abbreviations should be defined at first mention in manuscript.
Author Response
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: water resource carrying capacity and its influencing factors in the significant Yellow River Basin, China. It will be an interesting work for Sustainability reader. But it should be noticed that abbreviations should be defined at first mention in manuscript.
Response 1: Thank you for your feedback. This suggestion is highly valuable. We have reviewed and supplemented the relevant content accordingly. (Lines 13&54)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 6 Report
Brief summary of the study
This study carried out a comprehensive analysis of the spatial and temporal variations of water resource carrying capacity and the factors affecting it in the important Yellow River Basin of China. By combining the Composite Weighting TOPSIS method with the Geographic Detector analysis, the water resource carrying capacity index of nine provinces in the Yellow River Basin was evaluated from 2005 to 2021.
Differences in water resource carrying capacity between provinces were also identified and the important impact of factors such as economic development, population density, industrial wastewater discharge and rainfall was emphasized.
The results reveal a continuous upward trend in water resource carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin (significant improvements attributed to increased investments in scientific research, increased water use efficiency, proactive water resources management and environmental protection measures).
While Inner Mongolia and Ningxia provinces showed notable progress, Qinghai and Sichuan provinces exhibited slower growth, primarily due to geographical location and industrial development status.
Although some scientists have investigated spatial changes related to WRCC in the Yellow River basin, a comprehensive understanding of the influencing factors responsible for spatial differences is lacking.
Some novelties of the study are mentioned below:
1- An evaluation indicator system that enriches the theory and practice of sustainable water resources development for WRCC in the Yellow River Basin.
2- A comprehensive assessment of WRCC in nine provinces of the Yellow River Basin.
3-Using geodetector, factors influencing WRCC in the Yellow River Basin.
It was stated that the WRCC index in the Yellow River Basin increased continuously and reached 3,771 in 2021, indicating a significant improvement compared to the initial value in 2005. It has been noted that this has resulted in significant progress in the management and protection of water resources in the basin over the last sixteen years.
When the Importance of Reaction and Driving Force Indices is examined; It was stated that among the five sub-indices of WRCC, the Reaction (R) and Driving Force (D) indices experienced the highest growth rates with 397.3% and 128.3%, respectively. This has been said to highlight the importance of increased investment in scientific research and improved water resources management for improving WRCC in the Yellow River Basin.
When the Balancing of Environmental Improvement and Economic Development is examined; Pressure (P) and Condition (S) indices increased by 19.8% and 21.8%, respectively; It was stated that this indicates an improvement in the aquatic environment in the Yellow River Basin and the achievement of a certain balance between economic development and environmental protection.
When significant differences between provinces in WRCC were examined, it was said that WRCC indices showed significant differences among provinces, while Inner Mongolia and Ningxia provinces showed significant improvements, Qinghai and Sichuan provinces exhibited slower growth. It has been stated that these differences are affected by factors such as economic development, population density, industrial wastewater discharge and rainfall.
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Thank you for your comments sincerely, which are very important for this study, and I will respond to your suggestions one-on-one below.
Point 1: This study carried out a comprehensive analysis of the spatial and temporal variations of water resource carrying capacity and the factors affecting it in the important Yellow River Basin of China. By combining the Composite Weighting TOPSIS method with the Geographic Detector analysis, the water resource carrying capacity index of nine provinces in the Yellow River Basin was evaluated from 2005 to 2021.
Response 1: Thank you for your acknowledgment and for implementing the suggestions. The modifications and adjustments made to the paper are as follows:
（1）In the introduction section, we have restructured the reference list, incorporating recent and exemplary research findings.
（2）We have labeled the names of various provinces in Figure 1.
（3）We added Section 3.4 to assess the stability of research results.
（4）Sections 5.2 and 5.3 have been added to provide recommendations for enhancing the water resources carrying capacity in the Yellow River Basin and to outline prospects for future research.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors have improved the paper following the critiques in the last round. My decision is positive for this version.
Minor.
