Geospatial Analysis of Abandoned Lands Based on Agroecosystems: The Distribution and Land Suitability for Agricultural Land Development in Indonesia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Some comments for authors:

I recommend to use abbreviation of “abandoned land” – AL. To explain where it is first time used, and later only abbreviation should be used.

In the abstract section the results should be presented more concentrate, indicating most important results of the study.

row 16  -  assessing land suitability for abandoned land

row 320 - Land suitability evaluation for abandoned land

However, what are you assessing? Land suitability for abandoned land or abandoned land suitability for agricultural development? The meanings are controversial, and must to be changed.

There is no reference to the Table 1 in the text.

In the Table 1 it is difficult to understand the meaning of “v”. No any explanations? Maybe better Yes/No, or +/-?

Paragraph “2.4.4. Land suitability estimation based on visual interpretation results” not clearly defined.

Table 4, 5, 6. Lack of units.

Figure 7. Lack of explanation or legend of the colours in the map.

Each table and figure required analysis and explanations.

The article requires a majority of changes and must be improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is well written and the results are clearly presented. A fair amount of geospatial analysis of abandoned land was carried out at the national and district levels of Indonesia. 

In its current form, this is a good descriptive study but it fell short to have a clearly stated objective and how the geospatial analysis helped achieve that objective. I think the introduction section can be expanded a bit to address it. 

It would be valuable to include information about abandoned land ownerships (private vs. public) and accessibility (in terms of transportation), which are important factors to consider in the context of this study. 

My last comment is about expanding the recommendation section by prioritizing the recommended actions as well as discussing their associated policy implications.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I have reviewed the manuscript titled “Geospatial Analysis of Abandoned Lands Based on Agroecosystems: The Distribution and Land Suitability for Agricultural Land Development in Indonesia". This manuscript discusses the Agroecosystems and land suitability and land allocation, which is very important for building a new pattern for high-quality development.

I find it suitable for the Land but I have the following observations on this MS. 

The MS does contribute new in terms of methodology - a set of well-known methods have been applied for land suitability analysis for agriculture and development and these methods are important as well.

I see fruitful discussion on the generated datasets and a study area map is interactive. The introduction is improved and the scientific problem has been clearly identified and addressed.

I see little novelty in both scientific findings and methodological improvement. First, the authors should clearly state the scientific significance of mapping agroecosystems, rather than saying something very broad.

The introduction is strong, and the method section is trivial and vague at places. More recent literature work is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

After made correction the quality of article improved.