Health-Promoting Nature-Based Paradigms in Urban Planning

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The review is very well written and very easy to read and understand. Main historic events which triggered the paradigm changes, and their impact are presented in the paper. As this is an encyclopedia entry I suggest some minor rephrasing.

 

In introduction in sentence

 Today's dense cities with green areas characterized by lawns do not work.

Word dense doesn’t describe the type, it would be better to use densely populated or urbanized depending on what authors ment.

This part:

Below we begin to describe today's situation and anomalies related to today's planning of parks and green areas. Next, we describe the two major paradigm shifts that led to the planning and design of the parks and green areas we have in today's cities. The remaining part of the entry describes the gradual emergence of a new paradigm shift, which includes people's behavior and preferences for green areas; how exposure to or stay in green areas of different qualities can positively affect people's health and well-being, and also includes the function of green areas with regard to climate and biodiversity in smart urban areas.

 

 would be better formulated if it was written as: section 2 will present today’s situation and anomalies and so on. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article mainly discusses the nature-based paradigm related to health promotion in urban planning. It mentions the development of modernist architecture and its impact on urban planning, as well as the conceptual and technological development of smart cities. In addition, the article explores the importance of urban green infrastructure in combating climate change and improving people's health and well-being. These should be emphasized in the abstract and introduction. The article also mentions the rise in mental health problems and non-communicable diseases and stresses the importance of preventing these diseases through changes in people's lifestyles and health promotion measures. This article reviews the relevant research on the natural basis paradigm of health promotion in urban planning. Sections 2 to 4 of the article are chronological, and the author combs and summarizes the relevant conclusions in the literature well to support his own views. The logic between literature citations should be further strengthened. Then, for sections 5 to 9, it is suggested to reorganized into one section and sub-sections. Then, discuss and conclude.

 

However, this article lacks specific research data and empirical results to support the author's view. While the paper mentions a number of theories and hypotheses about the potential health effects of urban planning and green Spaces, it does not provide enough empirical research to support these ideas. Perhaps the authors can re-statistical the conclusions of existing studies through cluster analysis or meta-analysis to verify the exact impact of urban planning and green space on health.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English language is a bit vocal, which should be more academic.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The contribution is very interesting and relevant theoretical paper, but it is more new contribution by the researchers, new thoretical model than encyclopedia entry. If looking at the structure, I would suggest creating three major sections subdivided into subsections, as currently there are 10 sections with no sub-sections.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No issues detected and everything is corrected. I recommend the paper for publishing in this form.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Good improvement. Ready to be published.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have corrected the manuscript according to provided comments.