The Precariousness of Walloon Peri-Urban Agricultural Lands

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Given the geographical context of the field of study and the subject matter of the article, bibliographical references to Marc Antrop and Veerle Van Eetvelde are missing. In a broader context, there are works of recognised prestige at the European level which have not been included in the text, such as the following:

- Piorr, A., Ravetz, J., Tosics, I. (2011): Peri-urbanisation in Europe: Towards a European Policy to sustain Urban Rural Futures. Copenhagen, University of Copenhagen / Academic Books Life Sciences.

- Shaw, B. J., van Vliet, J., & Verburg, P. H. (2020). The peri-urbanization of Europe: A systematic review of a multifaceted process. Landscape and Urban Planning, 196, 103733.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We have strengthened our manuscript to embed it in the literature better. We know very well Antrop's work and collaborated several times with him. Nonetheless, Scopus did not mention any work linked with peri-urbanisation or focused on the uses of agricultural land. Pior et al. were already cited in the previous version, but we paid extra attention to it and analysed several papers in this vein. The suggestion of using Shaw was good; we used it as well as some works cited, or that cite this paper. 
As you can see, we have enriched the introduction and added, as recommended by the other reviewer, a conclusion including some policy implications. The figures were upgraded. We have also asked a native speaker to edit the paper.
Thank you for your time and suggestions, and we hope you find this new version better.
Regards,
Serge Schmitz & Lauriano Pepe

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The Precariousness of Walloon Peri-urban Agricultural Lands - land-2090005-peer-review-v1

Abstract

The policy implications part is missing in the abstract. 

Introduction

In the Introduction section, please clarify the justification for this research. The introduction section failed to show the research gap and novelty of this research. The research problem is not clear to the reader. Conclude the Introduction Section by stating the specific objectives. After the Introduction Section, please do a literature review to elaborate on the state of knowledge on the topic.

Materials and Methods

Figure 1 is not clear. Please provide a high resolution and readable map.

Results

Figure 2 is not clear. Re-draw figure 2 to make texts readable.

Authors should also create Conclusions and Policy Implications Section after Discussion Section

Author Response

Dear Reviewer
We are pleased to send you a new version of our paper that we enriched thanks to your suggestions. We have strengthened our manuscript to embed the document in the literature better. You can note that the number of references cited has significantly increased. As you can see, we have complemented the introduction to position the research in regard to the literature and underline its novelty. The introduction ends with the research objectives. We did not develop a proper state-of-the-art because several papers, including recent documents that we cite, did an excellent job. We added a conclusion including some policy implications. We also added policy implications to the abstract. The figures were upgraded to be readable. It is true that the previous version was problematic. We have also asked a native speaker to edit the paper.
Thank you for your time and suggestions that we have carefully followed. We hope you find this new version better and ready for publication.
Regards,

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed most of my comments