Multi-Criteria Decision-Making System for Wind Farm Site-Selection Using Geographic Information System (GIS): Case Study of Semnan Province, Iran

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

ID: sustainability-1739461

Article: Multi-criteria decision-making system for wind farm site-selection using geographic information system (GIS): case study of Semnan province, Iran

Authors: Hossein Yousefi, Saheb Ghanbari and Mohammad Montazeri

Dear Authors and Editors,

Thank you for inviting me as one of the reviewers for this manuscript. This study has significant practical implications for renewable energy particularly, wind energy and farm site selection problems. This study identified seveal aspects of the site locations based on expert interviews and a literature review. The study uses the AHP approach to obtain the weight of wind farm. Besides, the study. Then, the GIS approach is applied to analyze the provinces into suitable and unsuitable areas for farm site selection. The problem is worth investigating and adheres to the scientific scope of the Sustainability Journal. The editorial requirements are satisfied. I have some constructive comments in the attachment.

In my opinion, this manuscript should be considered in MAJOR REVISION before publication.

Best regards,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for devoting your valuable time to our paper entitled "Multi-criteria decision-making system for wind farm site-selection using geographic information system (GIS): a case study of Semnan province, Iran". We have carefully reviewed your comments and made changes to the paper, which resulted in a significant improvement in the quality of the paper compared to the past. In the following, some explanations about this research are provided, and then the answers related to each comment are represented separately. Also, during the revision process, Microsoft word track changes were on to mark the changes.

This paper studies the MCDM system to find the best area with the highest wind farm potential in Semnan, Iran.

We gathered various types of data, including the wind data and this province's structural and topological data. Also, according to previous studies and regional rules, ecological, structural, and topological restrictions are considered. Based on the opinion of the experts, their information is mentioned in the appendix, with seven main criteria considered and pairwise compared. AHP method was used to weigh the criteria. GIS tool is one of the most powerful and widely used tools in site-selection MCDM problems used to overlay the maps. The province's area is classified into nine classes according to weighted criteria. Finally, the unsuitable area comes from restrictions removed from the classified map The Figure 14, Figure 15 represent the province's classified area before removing the restricted area and after removing the restricted area.

Also, the English language of the manuscript was reviewed again to correct possible mistakes and improve the English writing of the paper.   

In the end, we appreciate the attention and time of the editors and reviewers and their valuable comments again. We hope that our revision will make our manuscript proper for publication in the sustainability journal.

Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors presented Multi-criteria decision-making system for wind farm site-selec- 2
tion using geographic information system (GIS): case study of 3 Semnan province, Iran. This is interesting topic, but I think the authors have to make extensive revise:

• Abstract too bad, the authors should mention about a reason they did this topic, introduce their proposed model, results, and contribution of this work.
• Literature review must separate with Introduction section.
• Introduction the author should present about your goals, structure of your manuscript 
• Research graph should be added and explanation more details
• Many researchers show that fuzzy AHP more efficient than AHP, why the author did not use Fuzzy AHP in this study.
• What did you learn from literature review? This content must be describe , it will connect with your proposed method and help it more convince.
• Where are criteria in Table 4 come from? Literature review or your experiences or experts?
• CR and CI index of AHP model must be calculate in details.
• Conclusion section should not present in numbering, it should be in paragraph.
• Research limit and future research have to add.
• Some of reference too old (2017), it should be replace.

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for devoting your valuable time to our paper entitled "Multi-criteria decision-making system for wind farm site-selection using geographic information system (GIS): a case study of Semnan province, Iran". We have carefully reviewed your comments and made changes to the paper, which resulted in a significant improvement in the quality of the paper compared to the past. In the following, some explanations about this research are provided, and then the answers related to each comment are represented separately. Also, during the revision process, Microsoft word track changes were on to mark the changes.

This paper studies the MCDM system to find the best area with the highest wind farm potential in Semnan, Iran.

We gathered various types of data, including the wind data and this province's structural and topological data. Also, according to previous studies and regional rules, ecological, structural, and topological restrictions are considered. Based on the opinion of the experts, their information is mentioned in the appendix, with seven main criteria considered and pairwise compared. AHP method was used to weigh the criteria. GIS tool is one of the most powerful and widely used tools in site-selection MCDM problems used to overlay the maps. The province's area is classified into nine classes according to weighted criteria. Finally, the unsuitable area comes from restrictions removed from the classified map The Figure 14, Figure 15 represent the province's classified area before removing the restricted area and after removing the restricted area.

Also, the English language of the manuscript was reviewed again to correct possible mistakes and improve the English writing of the paper.   

In the end, we appreciate the attention and time of the editors and reviewers and their valuable comments again. We hope that our revision will make our manuscript proper for publication in the sustainability journal.

Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Give recent references on the AHP method and write more about other MCDM methods. Give the reasons for using the AHP method and not some other MCDM method.

It is necessary to explain how the data in Table 4 are obtained? Are experts involved? If there were more of them, how did they agree? The table should also contain reciprocal values.

Explain how the AHP method yields weights.

Explain in more detail sentences in 194. row. Following the calculation of the weight of the criteria, the restrictions in the distances from each of the criteria and the maximum altitude were determined.

The layout is missing.

Indicates which MCDM methods are used in references 29 and 32 in Table 1.

Provides references based on which the most important criteria have been determined in line 105.

Give a reference for the data in Figure 3.

Author Response

Dear editor and reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for devoting your valuable time to our paper entitled "Multi-criteria decision-making system for wind farm site-selection using geographic information system (GIS): a case study of Semnan province, Iran". We have carefully reviewed your comments and made changes to the paper, which resulted in a significant improvement in the quality of the paper compared to the past. In the following, some explanations about this research are provided, and then the answers related to each comment are represented separately. Also, during the revision process, Microsoft word track changes were on to mark the changes.

This paper studies the MCDM system to find the best area with the highest wind farm potential in Semnan, Iran.

We gathered various types of data, including the wind data and this province's structural and topological data. Also, according to previous studies and regional rules, ecological, structural, and topological restrictions are considered. Based on the opinion of the experts, their information is mentioned in the appendix, with seven main criteria considered and pairwise compared. AHP method was used to weigh the criteria. GIS tool is one of the most powerful and widely used tools in site-selection MCDM problems used to overlay the maps. The province's area is classified into nine classes according to weighted criteria. Finally, the unsuitable area comes from restrictions removed from the classified map The Figure 14, Figure 15 represent the province's classified area before removing the restricted area and after removing the restricted area.

Also, the English language of the manuscript was reviewed again to correct possible mistakes and improve the English writing of the paper.   

In the end, we appreciate the attention and time of the editors and reviewers and their valuable comments again. We hope that our revision will make our manuscript proper for publication in the sustainability journal.

Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors and Editors,

In my opinion, the authors have carefully revised this manuscript in accordance with the reviewer's suggestions.

I suggest that this study is merit and ready for publication after having further editing from the Editors. 

Best Regards,

Author Response

Thank you very much for your positive feedback on our article.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you very much for your revision. I still have some comments:

1. For each criterion in Figure 4, it is necessary to write what it represents and why it is important when choosing wind farm. 

2. How to avoid rank reversal in AHP model? These content have to added in revised version

Author Response

1. For each criterion in Figure 4, it is necessary to write what it represents and why it is important when choosing wind farm. 

In the new version of the manuscript, a new paragraph is added to describe the importance of the criteria. This paragraph is available on page 9. In this paragraph, the importance of each criterion, and the impact of each criterion on costs, available power, and construction and maintenance process are discussed.

2. How to avoid rank reversal in AHP model? This content have to added in revised version.

In the new version of the manuscript, table 4 is revised, and all of the reversal numbers are added.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

I suggest that the paper should be published.

Best Regards,

Author Response

Dear reviewers,

First of all, we would like to thank you for your constructive comments and suggestions in previous and current comments. Thanks to these comments, our article has become much more accurate and valuable. In the new version of the manuscript, the new comments of the respected reviewers were reviewed and tried to be answered carefully. When making changes, the track change feature was enabled to indicate changes. In the following, our answers are explained

Reviewer 3:

Dear authors,

I suggest that the paper should be published.

Thank you very much for your positive feedback on our article.

In the end, thanks for the valuable comments of all reviewers in the first and second revision round. We hope our changes have made our paper ready for publication in the Sustainability journal. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors did not address my second concern, How to avoid rank reversal of AHP model? Rank reversal means that the relative rankings of two decision alternatives could be reversed when a decision alternative is added or deleted. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf