Article proposes a critique of a policy or practice with specific action proposals or suggestions.
Article follows conventions of academic research article e.g. position in literature, cited sources, and claimed contribution.
Article is based on developments that have not yet occurred.
Article is based on formal logic or mathematical technique.
Language quality: 2/2*
Standard of English expression in article is excellent.
Scope of debate: 2/2
Article addresses an issue which is widely known and debated.
Most related sources are mentioned in article [this is an invitation to careful selection rather than a demonstration of prowess in citation collection i.e. apt and representative choices made in source citations].
Logical flow: 2/2*
Ideas are well organised in article.
The argument presented in article is new.
Review impact: 2/2
The article has been significantly changed as a result of the review process.
Reviewers indicate their appreciation of the article in the form of a 50 word statement.
The article takes a use case to explore the possibility of constructing participatory actions through collaborative mapping techniques. The article is well written and insightful, as it navigates the whats in which citizens can work together to assemble a shared vision and understanding of public spaces.
This paper is highly readable, and makes a significant contribution to the issue. The authors present a novel combination of mapping and scenario analysis in an approach they term Visual Mapping. Despite the missed opportunities they identify in their case study, the authors also make a compelling case for this approach to be explored in future urban planning contexts.