Differential Influences of High-Speed Railway Stations on the Surrounding Construction Land Expansion and Institutional Analysis: The Case of Taiwan and Hainan

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: In the objective, the comparison between the two lines and the reason for the study are clear, however the intended gap in the scientific literature is not identified.

Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion. Following your suggestion, we have added gaps in current research to the scientific literature. Please see in the introduction.

Comments 2: A discussion of the contributions, comparing it with previous studies is missing. This is necessary in order to justify the research.

Response 2: Thank you for your suggestion. The major distinction of this study from previous research lies in its contribution to filling the gap in research on the correlation between land use changes around high-speed railway stations and the institutional environment. In real life, under different institutional arrangements, people's behavior of land development will be different, which is inevitable. However, few scholars measured the specific outcomes stemming from the expansion of construction land around HSR stations operating within distinct institutional contexts. We deem it crucial to uncover these effects. Because it can help us devise more efficient designs for future development and conservation strategies around high-speed rail stations. Consequently, we opted to employ the Taiwan high-speed railway stations and Hainan high-speed railway stations as the experimental group and the control group, respectively. The primary influential factors considered encompass the system of land planning institutions, land property rights institutions, and public participation institutions. We are confident that our research can offer a fresh perspective on institutional adaptation for achieving both land development and preservation in the vicinity of high-speed railway stations.

Comments 3: A general outline of the methods is necessary. It is not clear how the study is to be done. Also, in the abstract/objective it is stated that IAD will be used and it is not mentioned here.

Response 3: Thank you for you pointing this out. In line 12-14 of the abstract, we summarize the research methods include Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, multiple buffer analysis and GIS spatial analysis.

IAD framework is a framework for analyzing institutional individual and collecting choices designed by Ostrom. IAD framework divides situations into “Action Arena”, which include “Actors” and “Action situations”. “Actors" are influenced by “External Variables”, making choices within existing “rules”, and engaging in “Interactions”. Both the External Variables and “Actors” interactions result in outcomes, which are evaluated by the “Actors”. Such evaluation influences other components in the framework. We used this framework to analyse the impact of different participants on the development of construction land around high-speed railway stations under different institutional arrangements. The specific theoretical analysis of IAD Framework in “2.1 Analysis framework of the impact of HSR stations on the expansion of surrounding construction land”.

For the relevant work on GIS spatial analysis, see in the 3.2 and 3.3.

For an explanation of the multiple buffer analysis, see in the 3.4.

Comments 4: I recommend adding a paragraph at the end of the introduction describing the structure of the rest of the article.

Response 4: Thank you for your suggestion. In conjunction with the comments of another reviewer, we have added a paragraph at the end of the introduction to introduce the significance of the research and the structure of the rest of the article. Please see in the introduction.

Comments 5: Please, add the meaning of FLS, IAD, etc. the first time they appear in the text.

Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we add the means of initials IAD and FLUS when it first time appear in the text. Please see in Line 13 and Line 68.

Comments 6: A reference for "the basic trend of "first decrease, then increase, and then decrease", that is, the ideal curve” and figure 2 are required.

Response 6: Thank you for your suggestion. On this point, we would like to say that there is no direct reference for this trend of change, because this is the curve that we have derived by reasonable deduction. However, we cite a number of references in explaining why this has changed, please see in the 2.1 and 2.2.

Comments 7: Please add a location map with the lines and stations.

Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we add the location map. Please see in Line 206.  

Comments 8: Please, justify the value 0.5 km in line 240.

Response 8: In this study, 0.5km is selected as the buffer zone separation scale. The reasons are as follows: Verburg et al. (2004) believe that land development and utilization activities within 500m of a certain geographical object will have an important impact on the surrounding area, while such mutual influence will be weak beyond 500m. In addition, some scholars have pointed out that the development and construction activities around high-speed railway stations have obvious circle structure (Wang Hui and Zhang Meiqing 2021), and relevant empirical studies have shown that it is reasonable to demarcate the circle area with 500m as the buffer radius. Therefore, this paper takes the range of each high-speed railway station as the boundary and 500m as the radius to generate a total of 14 buffer rings for buffer analysis.

Inferences:

1. Verburg P H, de Nijs T C M, van Eck J R, et al. A method to analyse neighbourhood characteristics of land use patterns[J]. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 2004, 28(6): 667-690.

2. Zhang Hui, Zhang Meiqing. Impact of High-speed Rail on Accessibility and Economic Relations in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2021, 41(9): 1615-1624.

Comments 9: Table 2 is cut.

Response 9: Thanks for you pointing this out, we have made some adjustments to the format. Please see in the revised manuscript.

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: I recommend that the author re-check and change the content to academic English. Also, the symbol such as km2.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have checked the paper and modify the expression of km2.

Comments 2: The points that I am concerned about is the author states that, " We selected Landsat images with less than 5% cloud cover were selected for Taiwan 229 in 1999 and 2018, and for Hainan in 2006 and 2018. " As I showed in different periods of the time. It would be great if the author could generate the datasets within the same period. 

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. Our primary objective is to assess the impact of high-speed rail station development on land use expansion before and after the commencement of railway operations. To achieve this goal, we have selected imagery data at four distinct time points for analysis.

Comments 3: Table 2 is very useful. However, the note in the table mentions, " it was Source: Collected by the author." I think you should explain the methodology of collecting the information.

Response 3: Thanks for your suggestion. The contents in Table 2 were collected through the following steps: First, relevant laws, policy documents and cases related to high-speed railway construction were collected from the official websites and relevant websites of Hainan and Taiwan, and then the required texts were selected for comparative analysis. Finally, the selected contents and comparative analysis results were filled in the table.

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: The introduction is not focused enough and should focus on the impact of high-speed railway on the expansion of construction land. Especially the third paragraph, would it be more appropriate to introduce it in the research area?

Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion. First of all, I think your suggestion is very constructive, but I'd like to explain the introduction to you. The first paragraph introduces the background of China's high-speed railway construction, the importance of high-speed railway stations, and why we should pay attention to the land development around high-speed railway stations. The second paragraph focuses on the impact of high-speed railway stations on the expansion of surrounding construction land, as well as the underlying institutional factors. It expresses the necessity and significance of research by revealing the current research gap. Then the third paragraph introduces the reasons for choosing two high-speed railway lines for comparative study: similar background but different institutional environment, to carry on the above content. The first three paragraphs of the whole introduction are carried on with each other and have internal logic, which lays a good foundation for the subsequent research.

Comments 2: The analysis framework needs to be further streamlined.

Response 2: Thanks for you pointing this out, we optimized the analysis framework a little bit. Please see in 2.1.

Comments 3: 3.1 and the last paragraph of the introduction are repeated.

Response 3: Thanks for you pointing this out, we have reviewed the last paragraph of the introduction and section 3.1 and have made significant improvements to the manuscript.

Comments 4: Fig.3 should be a color Figure.

Response 4: Thanks for your suggestion, we have changed this figure. Please see in Line 269.

Comments 5: Institutional differences should be an important factor in the expansion of construction land near high-speed railways, but the question is a bit redundant.

Response 5: Thanks for you pointing this out. Indeed, institution play a crucial role in the expansion of construction land near high-speed railways. This includes collaboration and decision-making among local governments, railway companies, national authorities, and relevant regulatory bodies. However, different institutional will cause what specific results, we think it is necessary to identification. When we realize which decision is better to balance development and protection, we can adjust our policies and institutions.

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: However I suggested improving the discussion of the contributions, comparing it with previous studies is missing and it is not addressed in the main text. I consider this point necessary in order to justify the research.

Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion, we have added the discussion to the main text, please see in Line 92-102.

Comments 2: I also suggested justifying the value 0.5 km. Authors have explained it in their response, but it is not added in the main text. I suggest adding this explanation.

Response 2: Thank you for your suggestion, we have added new content to the main text, please see in Line 243-247.