Research on Spatial Patterns and Sustainable Development of Rural Tourism Destinations in the Yellow River Basin of China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is well structured and the methodology is robust. 

A number of substantial changes are found to be necessary for the improvement of the article, especially with regard to the literature:

- The introduction, which includes the literature, is excessively brief.
- The authors focus the introduction only on the Chinese case. The situation can be extrapolated to almost all rural tourism and it is necessary to go deeper into the theory of rural tourism in general.
- Therefore, given the nature of the study, it is necessary to go deeper into marketing issues. The sustainability of these spaces is hardly addressed.
- There is no review of similar studies using similar methodologies and geographical information systems.
- Nor is there any review of research on other rural areas in China or the world.

- There are no research objectives or hypotheses. Nor any research questions.

- In the methodology, elaborate on certain aspects: how the data was extracted, whether there was any cleaning, how the diagram of rural village types in the industry aspect is obtained.

- There is a significant disconnect between the discussion and conclusions and the results and methodology used. There is no summary of the quantitative results achieved in the conclusions. The discussion is too generic and addresses aspects that have not been dealt with in the results.

The implications, as in the introduction, are not extrapolated to the international rural tourism sector.

Despite presenting an interesting topic and a meritorious mathematical methodology, neither the novelty of the study nor the contribution to the literature is clearly highlighted. 

Author Response

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

1. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We are very sorry that we didn’t make a clear Introduction and Literature review part. In the revised manuscript, according to the comments of you and other reviewers, we have modified the Introduction and Literature.

The complete modification are in the Introduction and Literature (Page 1-6, line 29-222) of the revised manuscript.

2. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.In the revised manuscript, We have conducted an in-depth study of the general theory of rural tourism. This situation can be extrapolated to rural tourism in other countries and regions.

The complete modification are in the Section 2 (Page 4-6, line 123-222) of the revised manuscript.

3. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We have conducted research on marketing issues and reinterpreted the sustainable transformation mechanism of rural tourism.In response to marketing issues, we have supplemented and explained in the suggestion section.

The complete modification are in the Section 4 (Page 19, line 663-725) and Section 5 (Page 24, line 833-857)of the revised manuscript.

4. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We reviewed related similar methods and GIS methods, and provided clear explanations for each research method.

The complete modification are in the Section 3 (Page 7, line 237-248) of the revised manuscript.

5. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We conducted a research review of rural tourism in China and other rural areas of the world based on your suggestions.

The complete modification are in the Section 1 (Page 2-3, line 55-74) and Section 2 (Page 4-6, line 123-222) of the revised manuscript.

6. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have clearly described the research goals and problems of this article.

The complete modification are in the Section 1 (Page 3-4, line 108-115) of the revised manuscript.

7. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. According to your suggestion, in terms of methodology, we have explained in detail the data acquisition and clean up.We explained how to obtain the rural village types  in the industry aspect.

The complete modification are in the Section 3 (Page 9-10, line 331-348) of the revised manuscript.

8. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have adjusted the structure of the article and rewritten the conclusions and discussions.In the conclusion, we summarize the quantitative results obtained.

The complete modification are in the Section 5 (Page 21-22, line 727-770) of the revised manuscript.

9. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have rewritten the implication and extrapolated the impact to the International Rural Tourism Department.

The complete modification are in the Section 5 (Page 23-24, line 777-857) of the revised manuscript.

10. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have clearly explained the novelty of the research and the new contributions of the article, and presented the article to readers as much as possible.

The complete modification are in the Section 1 (Page 3, line 108-115) of the revised manuscript.

 

Dear reviewer, special thanks to you for your good comments.

The other changes are mainly about the grammars and spellings, so we didn’t mark them.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript according to your and other reviewers’ suggestions. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a good paper. Rural tourism is a key for the development in contryside. The sample is an excellent choice. The methodology is professional and the results can be useful for improvements.

I recommend these articles to use:

 Dávid Lóránt, Baros Zoltán, Patkós Csaba, Anja Tuohino Lake Tourism and Global Climate Change: an integrative approach based on Finnish and Hungarian case-studies CARPATHIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 7 : 1 pp. 121-136. , 16 p. (2012).

Please delete this part from the title: Take key rural tourism villages as an example - No duplication required.

Strengths
The results show that the spatial distribution of key rural tourism villages in the Yellow River Basin presents the distribution characteristics of more in the west and less in the east, more in the south and less in the north, showing a distribution pattern of one core and one belt. According to the industrial characteristics of key villages, the sustainable development path of rural tourism was proposed, and optimization suggestions were put forward from the perspective of sustainable livelihoods and land use, operation management and government policies.
 
Research area
The Yellow River basin spans across China's three comprehensive natural belts, covering 9 provinces and autonomous regions. This is a perfect choice.
 
Methodology
The nearest neighbour index can indicate the degree of mutual proximity of key rural tourism villages in the Yellow River Basin in geographic space, and can determine the type of spatial distribution.
The imbalance index is an indicator reflecting the distribution of key rural tourism villages within each province.
Kernel density estimation can intuitively reflect the spatial dispersion or agglomeration characteristics of geographic elements.
The global Moran index can be used to determine whether the spatial distribution of elements in a region is a clustering mode, a discrete mode or a random mode.
The geographic connection rate is used to analyse the degree of association between a certain element and other elements in a region, and can be used to analyse the relationship between the key rural tourism villages in the river basin and the regional tourism economy and GDP.
 
Based on the above analysis and conclusions, combined with the theory of rural development transformation, try to put forward the development mechanism of rural tourism key villages driven by tourism in the Yellow River Basin, please see Figure 9.
 
I agree that sustainable livelihoods are widely used in rural tourism development and rural transformation research.
 
Thus, this is a very up-to-date paper. The structure of the paper is logical. Sustainability Journal does not have strict formatting requirements, but all manuscripts must contain the required sections: Author Information, Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Materials & Methods, Results, Conclusions. This paper contains these.
 
According to the industrial characteristics of 22 key villages, the sustainable development path of rural tourism was proposed, and optimization suggestions were put forward from the perspective of sustainable livelihoods and land use, operation management and government policies.
 
I think an independent literature review part needed. The literature review (related work) should be strengthened.
 
I accept this paper after minor revision.

Author Response

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

1.Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We have read the recommended articles in detail and quoted this paper (Dávid Lóránt, Baros Zoltán, Patkós Csaba, Anja Tuohino Lake Tourism and Global Climate Change: an integrative approach based on Finnish and Hungarian case-studies CARPATHIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 7 : 1 pp. 121-136. , 16 p. (2012).) in the research of this article, which has an important contribution to the writing of this article. The theory, research methods and conclusions of this article are worthy of our reference. The impact of climate change on the development of tourism is particularly worthy of our attention. Thank you again for your suggestions.

The complete modification are in the Section 2 (Page 5, line 168-170) of the revised manuscript.

2.Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestion, we deleted the subtitle of the article—Taking Key Villages in Rural Tourism as an example.

The complete modification are in the Title (Page 1, line 2-4) of the revised manuscript.

3.Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have added an independent literature review section and reviewed relevant studies in other regions.

The complete modification are in the Section 2 (Page 4, line 123) of the revised manuscript.

 

Dear reviewer, special thanks to you for your good comments.

The other changes are mainly about the grammars and spellings, so we didn’t mark them.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript according to your and other reviewers’ suggestions. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,
After reading the first version of your manuscript, I am still not fully persuaded that the article goes into details enough to provide an added value to Land readership.
This time, I will try to give my comments in a more clear version:
The author needs to clarify the new contribution of the research in the introduction.
The author should have a literature review to compare the results of previous studies conducted in the same research context. From there, the author clarified the requirements for the study. The author needs to compare with other aspects.
There should be a clear description of the methodology. The author needs to argue on this issue.
Which indicator would be the most relevant before doing the research?
Does the author need to adjust to suit the context?
Kind regards,
Reviewer

Author Response

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

1. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused to you by our article problem. After receiving your suggestion, we sincerely accept it and modify it as soon as possible. We sincerely hope that this modification can be approved by you.According to your suggestion. We have modified and corrected the grammar, spelling and formatting. We also have invited an English native speaker colleague to help us to ensure the quality of the revised manuscript. Your encouragement will become the driving force for our continuous efforts, and we would like to express our sincere respect to you again.

 

2. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we elaborated on the new contribution of the article in the introduction. We hope that our modification can be approved by you, we will be very grateful.

The complete modification are in the Introduction (Page 3-4, line 107-115) of the revised manuscript.

3. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have added an independent literature review section to compare with rural tourism research in China and the rest of the world.We further clarified the requirements of the research and compared it with other aspects. We hope that our modification can be approved by you, we will be very grateful.

The complete modification are in the Section 2 (Page 4-6, line 123-222) of the revised manuscript.

4. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. Based on your suggestions, we have clearly described each research method used in the article, which will make it easier for you to read and understand. We apologize for the inconvenience caused.

The complete modification are in the Section 3 (Page 6-10, line 237-348) of the revised manuscript.

5. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. According to your suggestion, we have conducted an in-depth inspection of the article. Since the problem studied in this article belongs to the preliminary discussion stage of rural tourism in China, the index problem you raised has not been deeply involved. When we refer to other scholars’research on similar aspects, we have not given a clear explanation on this issue, but this will also become our future research direction. We apologize again for the inconvenience caused. Some of the papers we refer to are as follows:

Cui, J.; Li, R.; Zhang, L.; Jing, Y. Spatially Illustrating Leisure Agriculture: Empirical Evidence from Picking Orchards in China. Land 2021, 10, 631.

Liu, G.; Doronzo, D.M. A Novel Approach to Bridging Physical, Cultural, and Socioeconomic Indicators with Spatial Distributions of Agricultural Heritage Systems (AHS) in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6921.

 

6. Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion. According to your suggestions, we have adjusted the article structure to provide you and readers with a more convenient reading experience, making the article structure smoother and more logical.We are very grateful for your suggestions and wish you good health and success at work

The complete modification are in the Section 5 (Page 19, line 663) and Section 5 (Page 21, line 726)of the revised manuscript.

 

Dear reviewer, special thanks to you for your good comments.

The other changes are mainly about the grammars and spellings, so we didn’t mark them.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript according to your and other reviewers’ suggestions. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for the opportunity to review the article again. The authors have made a meritorious effort based on the recommendations made: previous research and literature, other studies based on GIS, improvement of conclusions, etc..

However, the authors claim to have indicated the research questions but they are not located in the text. What the authors mention on pages 9-10 are not research questions or hypotheses. Moreover, they should be stated prior to the analysis following the literature review.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Thanks for the opportunity to review the article again. The authors have made a meritorious effort based on the recommendations made: previous research and literature, other studies based on GIS, improvement of conclusions, etc..

 

1. However, the authors claim to have indicated the research questions but they are not located in the text.

 

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

Thank you very much for your sincere suggestions, which have an important contribution to the improvement of this article, and your encouragement is the driving force for our continuous improvement. In response to your suggestions, we have separately emphasized and explained the research issues in this article, so that it can be better reflected in the article.

 

The complete modification are in the Introduction (Page 3-4, line 104-124) of the revised manuscript. The revised parts of this round are marked in green.

 

2. What the authors mention on pages 9-10 are not research questions or hypotheses. Moreover, they should be stated prior to the analysis following the literature review.

 

 

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

Based on your suggestions, we revised and improved the overall layout of the literature review. So that the literature review can be better displayed to you and readers.

The complete modification are in the Section 2 (Page 5, line 159-162) and Section 2 (Page 5, line 191-194) and Section 2 (Page 6, line 224-229)of the revised manuscript.  The revised parts of this round are marked in green.

Dear reviewer, special thanks to you for your good comments.

The other changes are mainly about the grammars and spellings, so we didn’t mark them.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript according to your and other reviewers’ suggestions. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Author,

The article has significantly improved compared to the previous version.
The main sections according to the article layout are clearly presented.

Best regards.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Author,

The article has significantly improved compared to the previous version.
The main sections according to the article layout are clearly presented.

Best regards.

 

Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your suggestion.

First of all, Based on the suggestions of you and other reviewers, we revised the article again. These suggestions have an important contribution to the improvement of the article. Your encouragement is the driving force for our continuous efforts. Secondly, Based on your suggestions, we re-explained the main part of the article in detail so that the main part of the article can be displayed to you and readers more clearly. Finally, for the inconvenience caused to you by our article, we once again apologize and wish you success in your work and good health.

The complete modification are in the Introduction (Page 4, line 132-138) and Section 4 (Page 10-11, line 372-381) of the revised manuscript. The revised part of this round is marked in green.

 

Dear reviewer, special thanks to you for your good comments.

The other changes are mainly about the grammars and spellings, so we didn’t mark them.

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript according to your and other reviewers’ suggestions. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. We appreciate for Reviewers’ warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval.

Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.doc