Review Reports - Evaluation of the Risk Induced by Soil Erosion on Land Use. Case Study: Guruslău Depression

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript "EVALUATION OF THE RISK INDUCED BY SOIL EROSION ON THE LAND USE" was submitted to Sustainability journal. It's valuable research about soil erosion. The topic is similar to the scope of Sustainability journal, but I have some concerns as following and you can improve the quality of this research:

It is recommended to re-write the abstract and highlight the quantitative results. The research findings are precious, it is recommended to mention a little more quantitative results in the abstract.
The introduction is well written and the importance and necessity of the research are stated, congratulations.
In the study area section, please talk about the climatic and hydrological information of the area. Most of this information is about spatial information.
What was the spatial resolution of DEM that used in calculation of LS factor?
How to calculate the p-factor. How is the information in this section extracted?
How is the factor k calculated? What is the spatial resolution of this factor?
It is recommended that Figures 4, 7 and 9 will been mixed as one.
One of significant concerns is that the authors should carefully develop a discussion section to talk about the significance, shortages or advantages of the methods you proposed, the reliability and meaning of your results (compared to other related studies) etc.
In conclusion, the authors should present new content in one paragraph and refrain from providing references in this section.
I checked plagiarism detection of this research and the similarity is 19% and there are some concerns; please check the attached file.
I am concerned about the similarities in this article, be sure to correct the highlighted items in the attached file.
Please be sure that all the references cited in the manuscript are also included in the reference list and vice versa with matching spellings and dates.

Best regards

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “EVALUATION OF THE RISK INDUCED BY SOIL EROSION ON THE LAND USE. CASE STUDY: GURUSLĂU DEPRES-SION”.

We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portions are marked in blue in the paper.

Q1. It is recommended to re-write the abstract and highlight the quantitative results. The research findings are precious, it is recommended to mention a little more quantitative results in the abstract.

The abstract was rewritten, adding mentions regarding the quantitative results obtained as a result of the implementation of the proposed methodology. We introduced the following paragraph:

”The induced risk estimation is based on the qualitative rating of the soil erosion vulnerability on a scale from 1 to 5 (1-low vulnerability; 5-high vulnerability) and the reduction of the economic value of the land, according on the vulnerability. The implemented methodology highlights the quantitative risk, with its maximum value of about 46.000 EUROs, spatially identified on large surfaces on the outskirts of Jibou polarizing center. It is mainly caused by the impact of soil erosion on large areas of orchards, which provide the necessary products for consumption. The present methodology can be implemented on similar areas and can be used as a model of good practices in risk assessment based on financial losses by local public authorities.”

Q2. The introduction is well written and the importance and necessity of the research are stated, congratulations.

Thank you for your remarks!

Q3. In the study area section, please talk about the climatic and hydrological information of the area. Most of this information is about spatial information.

We added in the text the following paragraph:

”According to previous studies on climate change, in the last 30 years there has been an increase in the intensity and frequency of extreme climatic episodes [55, 56], which have a direct impact on soil erosion and surface runoff [57]. The increase in precipitation intensity influences the surface runoff and implicitly the soil erosion [58-60]. An increase in heavy rainfall in areas where agricultural land management is deficient also causes degradation of agricultural plots and meadows [61], thus influencing environmental factors, inducing the need for the analysis performed in the present study. ”

Q4. What was the spatial resolution of DEM that used in calculation of LS factor?

The DEM used in calculation of Ls factor has a spatial resolution of 25 m, based on EU-DEM resolution. We added in the text the following paragraph:

”… obtained through the management of the EU-DEM digital database, version 1.0, with a spatial resolution of 25 m, which best highlights the morphometric changes in the study area and provides the standard working resolution of the implemented models. The spatial analysis formula used for the spatial identification of the Ls factor was developed by Mitasova et al (1996) [63] and was implemented by the form:..”

We also modified the formula of the Ls factor, replacing ”resolution” with ”25”, value which represents the resolution of DEM, and ”slope of DEM” with ”slope”:

”Ls=( /22,13 , 0,6) 0,01745/0,0896, 1,3)”

Q5. How to calculate the p-factor. How is the information in this section extracted?

The P factor was not considered because we couldnʼt identify major protection practices against soil erosion, which is highlighted by the last sentences from the P factor section from the methodology section.

Q6. How is the factor k calculated? What is the spatial resolution of this factor?

The K factor has a spatial resolution of 25 m. We added in the text details about the K factor:

”The values of the soil erodibility factor (K) were assigned to the soil categories from the study area according to the model developed by Moțoc M. et al. (1975) [57] and are valid for the pedological and climatic conditions from Romania, based on criteria related to soil texture, permeability and degree of erosion. The development of the spatial database representing the K factor is based on the soil map of Romania 1:200 000, vectorized and converted to raster format, at a spatial resolution of 25 m, resolution used for all raster databases used for modelling.”

Q7. It is recommended that Figures 4, 7 and 9 will been mixed as one.

Thank you for your suggestion, we modified the figures.

Q8. One of significant concerns is that the authors should carefully develop a discussion section to talk about the significance, shortages or advantages of the methods you proposed, the reliability and meaning of your results (compared to other related studies) etc.

We developed the discussion based on the results and highlighted the importance of the study:

”The results obtained as a result of the implementation of the proposed spatial analysis model obviously highlight the poor management of the lands in terms of their protection against surface soil erosion. Given the fact that the land pretability and land use in the study area highlight large areas cultivated with cereals and having as main land use the category of ”orchards”, it makes most of the production to be used in households and for sale on the market of cities in its area of influence. The assessment of the financial risk on these lands has a very significant utility for the development of integrated land management policies by the local public authorities, having as main purpose the increase of the production value of the lands affected by soil erosion, while increasing the offer on the market of the products derived from the specific crops of the orchards. The reduction of the risk identified near the Jibou polarizing center would maximize the profit obtained as a result of capitalizing on a higher production on the consumer market in the city and neighbouring urban centers [66, 67]. The analysis of the result obtained in the entire study area can serve as a working support for the companies which provide crop insurance to the action of some external risk factors, in this case, to surface soil erosion.

Q9. In conclusion, the authors should present new content in one paragraph and refrain from providing references in this section.

We have reorganized the conclusions so that they consist of a single paragraph and added the following:

”The implementation of the model proposed in the present study on large areas leads to the reduction of costs in terms of crop implementation, with the main purpose on ensuring sales in urban markets and for own consumption, while maximizing profits and reducing financial incentives provided by government agencies to reduce losses due to surface soil erosion. The result of the present model can be used as substantiation study for the evaluation of projects whose main purpose is to establish new species of crops, identifying from the beginning the productive economic potential of the land and reducing the economic losses, leading to eligible projects for public funding.”

Q10. I checked plagiarism detection of this research and the similarity is 19% and there are some concerns; please check the attached file. I am concerned about the similarities in this article, be sure to correct the highlighted items in the attached file.

Regarding the similarities, we checked the report sent by you and the degree of similarity is mainly caused by the fact that the abstract and a part of the methodology were presented at the virtual conference BRIDGING REGIONAL RESPONSES TO MARGINALIZATION AND DISPARITIES IN A GLOBALIZED WORLD, organized by the International Geographical Union’s Commission C20.32 Marginalization, Globalization, and Regional and Local Responses, in partnership with the Centre for Regional Geography of Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, on 9-10 August 2021. The organizers uploaded these resources online. The fact that this material was presented at the mentioned conference made us frame it in a scientific paper and propose it for publication, taking into account the appreciations of the proposed methodology and the recommendations received as a result of its public presentation. Another reason for this degree of similarity is that the software used for plagiarism check did not consider the citations of each of the factors used, while recognizing their formulas and representations as similarity. The terms in the formulas are technical terms, which have the same explanation in any context. Another major element considered as similarity by the software is the way the text is formatted and the information from each template page of the journal; the names of the authors and their affiliation were also considered as similarity.

Q11. Please be sure that all the references cited in the manuscript are also included in the reference list and vice versa with matching spellings and dates.

We checked all the cited articles and made corrections where we failed to quote in the respective text in the Bibliography.

Best regards

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is focus on the soil erosion in the Guruslău Depression. The topic is relevant to the topic and is interest for the readers of Sustainability. The abstract is correct. Material and methods require further improvement. The Results through the discussion section are ok.

L79-93: The Introduction is very brief and the results of previous studies should be summarized. The novelty of this paper is not clear and it should be stressed.

L162: The methods are critical to the evaluation of the paper. Please provide a photo of the experimental design.

Results: there were a lot of descriptions of results. You should summarize the results and make them simple and clear.

The conclusion section needs further improvement.

L458-460: The basis of this conclusion?

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “EVALUATION OF THE RISK INDUCED BY SOIL EROSION ON THE LAND USE. CASE STUDY: GURUSLĂU DEPRES-SION”.

We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in blue in the paper.

Q1. L79-93: The Introduction is very brief and the results of previous studies should be summarized. The novelty of this paper is not clear and it should be stressed.

In the Introduction we have highlighted only the methods and models used in the scientific literature, with the aim of providing the background for the development of the complex model proposed by us.

We added information in the Results and discussion:

Q2. L162: The methods are critical to the evaluation of the paper. Please provide a photo of the experimental design.

There is Fig. 2. in the article, which highlights the structure of the two integrated spatial analysis models for the identification of the final risk, while representing the spatial and non-spatial databased used, the methodological steps and their correlation.

Q3. Results: there were a lot of descriptions of results. You should summarize the results and make them simple and clear.

The results are presented in graphical form (maps and graphs), based on the quantitative results obtained as a result of the implementation of the two models. In order to synthesize the results and highlight their influence on the study area, we gave up their tabular presentation and the final graphic of the result, which were discussed and analysed in the text, moving them as supplementary files (Fig 1; Table 1; Table 2; Table 3).

Meanwhile, we added a paragraph in the Results, to highlight the reality in the territory:

” The reduction of the risk identified near the Jibou polarizing centre would maximize the profit obtained as a result of capitalizing on a higher production on the consumer market in the city and neighbouring urban centres [66, 67]. The analysis of the result obtained in the entire study area can serve as a working support for the companies which provide crop insurance to the action of some external risk factors, in this case, to surface soil erosion.”

Q4. The conclusion section needs further improvement.

We have reorganized the conclusions so that they consist of a single paragraph and added the following:

Q5. L458-460: The basis of this conclusion?

We completed the conclusions to highlight the practical utility and applicability of the models presented.

Best regards

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript "EVALUATION OF THE RISK INDUCED BY SOIL EROSION ON THE LAND USE" was submitted to Sustainability journal. It's a nice research about soil erosion. The topic is similar to the scope of Sustainability journal, but I have a concern. The authors speak about USLE model, but they don’t use P factor in this study. It’s very important that author mention some references from other studies that they don't use P factor in USLE model as same as current research.

Regards

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your reviewers’ comments concerning our manuscript entitled “EVALUATION OF THE RISK INDUCED BY SOIL EROSION ON THE LAND USE. CASE STUDY: GURUSLĂU DEPRESSION”.

We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. Revised portion are marked in blue in the paper.

The explanation for the fact that factor P was not used in the GIS model applied in this article was argued by adding some citations from studies in which similar procedures were performed for various reasons.

We also added the information in the text:

“Similar approach was made in studies at European scale because of the difficult to estimate this factor for large areas [64] and in detailed studies when these measures did not exist [65, 66].”

Thanks for the suggestion!

Best regards