Peer Review History

Original SubmissionOctober 23, 2022
Decision Letter - Jun Yang, Editor

PONE-D-22-29277Evaluation of the operation status and characteristics of the pattern of the residential land market in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in ChinaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Li,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 23 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jun Yang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

" National Natural Science Foundation of China (project No.41471090) and Science Foundation of Hebei Normal University (project No. L2021B29).Jingfeng Ge is the owner of National Natural Science Foundation of China (Fund No.41471090) and Can Li is the owner of Science Foundation of Hebei Normal University Foundation (project No.L2021B29)."

Please state what role the funders took in the study.  If the funders had no role, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript." 

If this statement is not correct you must amend it as needed. 

Please include this amended Role of Funder statement in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that Figures 1, 4a-4h and 5a-b in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1, 4a-4h and 5a-b  to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.  

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors use land market network data and statistical yearbook to evaluate the operation status and characteristics of the pattern of the residential land market in Beijing-Tianjin-Heibei region.Which can promote the coordinated socio-economic development. However, there have some problems need to be revised.

1.In title, the authors should clarify the pattern clearly. Is it spatial pattern, market pattern or others.

2.The content of background is too much.It should be simplified.

3.The content of references are listed simply in literature review. It is lack of summarizing.

4.The authors' name of references should not shown in text.

5.In study area, the logic is too mess, I suggest the authors remove the redundant content.

6.In methods, what is the foundation of classify the market operation into five states?

7.The serial number of sub-title should be supplied. In results, the sub-title is too simple. The authors should revise to high quality sub-title. Such as spatial-temporal evolution of residential land market and so on.

8.The abbreviation of urban residents' disposable income level is UPDI, why the abbreviation of land price-retail price index is not LPRPI?

9.There have two research scale city and county. The authors should illustrate it clearly.

10.How to divide indices of residential land market into five states by ArcGIS. Is it natural breaks(Jenks)or others? The number range of each states also need to supplied. The version of ArcGIS should be illustrated too.

11.The English is really poor. The authors should find a professional instituition to re-edit it. The conciseness of presentation is not enough in this manuscript.

12.In discussion, the content of this section is recommand policy or influencing factor? What are you want to present? The logic is really mess.

13.Some relevant references should be cited as follow.

Response characteristics and influencing factors of carbon emissions and land surface temperature in Guangdong Province,China. Urban Climate,2022:101330.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101330.

Seasonal Differences in Land Surface Temperature under Different Land Use/Land Cover Types from the Perspective of Different Climate Zones.Land,2022,11,1122.doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081122.

Spatial and temporal heterogeneity of urban land area and PM2.5 concentration in China. Urban Climate,2022,45:101268. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101268.

Spatio-temporal evolution and factors of climate comfort for urban human settlements in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area.Front.Environ.Sci.2022,10:1001064. doi:10.3389/fenvs.2022.1001064.

Reviewer #2: This paper presents an interesting topic. The following issues still need to be further improved and explained:

1.The introduction should introduce a series of policies were issued to support the development of residential land market in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in China, and the introduction should introduce the relevant policy background of implementing the Development policy in this period. What is the meaning of the policy.

2.This is an interesting study based on extensive Statistical material. The authors should focus on improving the readability of the paper, in particular by avoiding data for data's sake.

3. The diagrams of the manuscript need refinement. For example, the map of the study area needs to be labelled with the South China Sea and the Diaoyu Islands; the pictures are blurred and the names of the cities are not visible

4. Analysis of the manuscript's thematic concerns about its characteristics of the pattern, it is recommended to add some references, for example, “Spatial-Temporal Patterns of Network Structure of Human Settlements Competitiveness in Resource-Based Urban Agglomerations”,“Spatial Responses of Ecosystem Service Value during the Development of Urban Agglomerations ” and “Morphological and functional polycentric structure assessment of megacity: An integrated approach with spatial distribution and interaction”.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Revision 1

For the additional requirements of editing, our answers are as follows:

1. We checked the manuscript to make it conform to the style requirements of PLOS ONE.

2. The funders played a relevant role in this article, Jingfeng Ge has done Writing-review & editing; Can Li has done project management and supervision.

3. The figures in this paper is made according to the picture released by the Ministry of Natural Resources of China. The review number is GS (2016) No. 1610, which does not involve copyright protection.

In addition, for the language questions raised by reviewer, we put the proofs of the article retouching in the ‘other’ folder.

Reviewer #1

Comments:

1.In title, the authors should clarify the pattern clearly. Is it spatial pattern, market pattern or others.

Reply: The authors appreciated the reviewer’s kindly and careful comments and suggestions. What’s more, the authors added 'space-time pattern' to the title of this article and changed it to '' ‘Evaluation of the operation status of the residential land market in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region of China and Its spatiotemporal pattern characteristics’ Thanks.

2.The content of background is too much. It should be simplified.

Reply: Thanks for your constructive suggestion. The authors have simplified the introduction.

3.The content of references are listed simply in literature review. It is lack of summarizing.

Reply: Thanks for your insightful and interesting question. We have summarized and classified the references, and added an inductive evaluation at the end of the paragraph.

4.The authors' name of references should not show in text.

Reply: Thank you for your correction. We have deleted the author's name from the references.

5.In study area, the logic is too mess, I suggest the authors remove the redundant content.

Reply: Thank you for your valuable suggestions. We have deleted irrelevant content, such as land price and economic development level. The changed contents are displayed in Lines 136-145 in the Revised Main Manuscript.

6.In methods, what is the foundation of classify the market operation into five states?

Reply: We made a detailed description in the second part of the method, that is, using K-S test and 3σ methods for defining five states of " overheated, slightly hot, healthy, slightly cold, overcooled " were formulated. The results of K-S test are shown in Table 2, and Table 3 proves the application of 3σ methods. Finally, the interval division of five states is shown in Table 4. Thanks.

7.The serial number of sub-title should be supplied. In results, the sub-title is too simple. The authors should revise to high quality sub-title. Such as spatial-temporal evolution of residential land market and so on.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestion, and we set the short title as ‘Evaluation on the operation of residential land market’. And prepare to modify in the submission system.

8.The abbreviation of urban residents' disposable income level is UPDI, why the abbreviation of land price-retail price index is not LPRPI?

Reply: Thanks for your insightful and interesting question. We abbreviated 'land price detail price index' as ‘LPRPI’, and revised lines 201, 271 and 528 in the revised manuscript.

9.There have two research scale city and county. The authors should illustrate it clearly.

Reply: Thank you for your valuable comments. It is necessary to explain the two research scales. In the abstract part of this paper, it is explained that the data collection and calculation are carried out by taking the county as the unit. At the beginning of the results section, it is stated that the average value of the market state index of residential land in all counties within the jurisdiction of each city is calculated as the market state index of urban residential land, taking cities as the unit. Because taking cities as a unit has a more concise role in explaining the differences between regions.

10.How to divide indices of residential land market into five states by ArcGIS. Is it natural breaks (Jenks)or others? The number range of each states also need to supplied. The version of ArcGIS should be illustrated too.

Reply: This is an important question. We do not use natural breaks (Jenks). In ArcGIS, we use specific value intervals to divide five states. The specific value intervals can be seen in Table 4. In addition, we have updated the pictures. According to your requirements, we have placed the range of five levels in the legend area of Fig 4 and Fig 5. Finally, the version number of ArcGIS 10.2 is added in line 445 and line 504 of the revised manuscript.

11.The English is really poor. The authors should find a professional instituition to re-edit it. The conciseness of presentation is not enough in this manuscript.

Reply: Thank you for your comments. We polished the article and put the polish proof in other folders.

12.In discussion, the content of this section is recommand policy or influencing factor? What are you want to present? The logic is really mess.

Reply: Thanks a lot for your careful comments. It may be that the subtitle 'Comparison of Residential Land Market Status and Policy Orientation in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei' cannot clearly explain the content of the discussion. We have revised two subtitles and changed 'policy orientation' to 'policy recommendations'. They are placed in lines 474-475 and 517-518 of the revised manuscript. It is worth mentioning that our discussion has two parts, representing two dimensions, namely, the dimensions of the three provincial regions in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei and the dimensions of the county level. Each part also discusses the current situation and policy recommendations. According to the suggestion, we adjusted some statements.

13.Some relevant references should be cited as follow.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestion. After referring to the corresponding literature, we added the literature to our article.

Reviewer #2:

1.The introduction should introduce a series of policies were issued to support the development of residential land market in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region in China, and the introduction should introduce the relevant policy background of implementing the Development policy in this period. What is the meaning of the policy.

Reply: The authors appreciated the reviewer’s precise and insightful comments and suggestions, which could significantly improve the logicality, fluency and accuracy of the manuscript. The introduction of the policy part is to highlight the importance and necessity of the current research in Beijing Tianjin Hebei region. At the same time, we have deleted the redundant parts. Make the logic clearer. Thanks.

2.This is an interesting study based on extensive Statistical material. The authors should focus on improving the readability of the paper, in particular by avoiding data for data's sake.

Reply: Thank you for your constructive suggestions. We have the same feeling about the data display as you do, and we do not want to display too much data. We have filtered the data display as much as possible, and explained the data and described the readability in text after the data. We really hope to get your understanding.

3. The diagrams of the manuscript need refinement. For example, the map of the study area needs to be labelled with the South China Sea and the Diaoyu Islands; the pictures are blurred and the names of the cities are not visible.

Reply: Thanks for your careful suggestions. We have now updated the map of the study area and adjusted other pictures appropriately.

4. Analysis of the manuscript's thematic concerns about its characteristics of the pattern, it is recommended to add some references, for example, “Spatial-Temporal Patterns of Network Structure of Human Settlements Competitiveness in Resource-Based Urban Agglomerations”,“Spatial Responses of Ecosystem Service Value during the Development of Urban Agglomerations ” and “Morphological and functional polycentric structure assessment of megacity: An integrated approach with spatial distribution and interaction”.

Reply: Thank you for your suggestions on the references. We have added some of the l references you suggested. If there are still shortcomings, you are welcome to point them out clearly.

Attachments
Attachment
Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx
Decision Letter - Jun Yang, Editor

Evaluation of the operation status of the residential land market in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region of China and Its spatiotemporal pattern characteristics

PONE-D-22-29277R1

Dear Dr. Li,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Jun Yang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Accept

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: All the problems have been addressed. The conclusions are too long, it should be refined and shorted further.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

Formally Accepted
Acceptance Letter - Jun Yang, Editor

PONE-D-22-29277R1

Evaluation of the operation status of the residential land market in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region of China and Its spatiotemporal pattern characteristics

Dear Dr. Li:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Jun Yang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .