Review Reports - Differentiation Rule and Driving Mechanisms of Collapse Disasters in Changbai County

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In my opinion, the subject of this work is relevant for the Journal Sustainability after minor revision.

The topic of the paper is very interesting and important, especially because presented disaster in the very interesting part of China.

The Sustainability journal readers, and sufficiently interesting to warrant publication. Also, this Journal wants paper could be with high impact and with strong scientific innovations. First, the paper has the next sections and sub-section (i.e. Abstract, Geological setting, Methods, DEA model, Indicator grading and quantified values, Data processing and information collection, Evaluation and Analysis, Evaluation process, Discussion, Conclusions).

In the section of Abstract author must better describe why they researched this part of China and put some new sentences about that in the body of Abstract.

In the section of Introduction important to add more similar and same research published.

Figure 1,

Please change the title of the First Figure (Map) and mark a better research area position on the main map.

The author's must write the resolution of 1:50000, with the next labeling 1: 50,000. It is must be changed to all in the text.

DEA model or nonparametric method must be a better described and cited, the text in this section is overall short.

The sub-section of Data processing and information collection is more important and sensitive for this paper.

The authors named that they used ArcGIS software, the authors must explain which kind of version and how they produce the map and spatial analysis. The authors must better explain this.

Did the authors think about SQL database or something different? Please explain better

The references which reflect the good use of GIS and Remote methodology are

- Aleksandar Valjarević, Tatjana Djekić, Vladica Stevanović, Radomir Ivanović, Bojana Jandziković,GIS numerical and remote sensing analyses of forest changes in the Toplica region for the period of 1953–2013,Applied Geography,Volume 92,2018,Pages 131-139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.01.016.

Zhijun, T., Jiquan, Z. & Xingpeng, L. GIS-based risk assessment of grassland fire disaster in western Jilin province, China. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23, 463–471 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-008-0233-7

The authors must better describe the section of Conclusion; this section must be mandatory extend. In the end, I recommend Minor Revision.

In the end I want to say that this paper for me is very good written and presented.

Good luck to the authors

The Reviewer#2

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Professor: I have revised my paper as required,Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

There are some points that you should consider.

Line 50. Please remove the sentence “The following main references confirm my statement”

Although the title of the section 2 is geological setting, there is no adequate information about the geology of the investigated region. Thus, please add some geological description into this section.

Please add “meter” to the scale bar of DEM in figure 1.

Please explain the formulas in the lines 163-168 more detailed.

In line 190 please explain the geological disasters for the benefit of the readers.

Please give an explanation about the reliability of the method used for the benefit of the readers.

You mentioned a drawback in the conclusion. Is there any disadvantages or weakside of the method used.

Author Response

Dear Prof:

we thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript, we appreciate editor and reviewers very much for their positive and constructive comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Differentiation rule and driving mechanisms of collapse disasters in Changbai County”. (ID:1540749).

We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision. We have tried our best to revise our manuscript according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

Modify the paper as required, and the framework is as follows:

1 Line 50. Please remove the sentence “The following main references confirm my statement”

【Solution】removed

2 Although the title of the section 2 is geological setting, there is no adequate information about the geology of the investigated region. Thus, please add some geological description into this section.

【Solution】Solve as required

3 Please add “meter” to the scale bar of DEM in figure 1.

【Solution】Modified all

4 Please explain the formulas in the lines 163-168 more detailed.

【Solution】modified and related reference added

5 In line 190 please explain the geological disasters for the benefit of the readers.

Please give an explanation about the reliability of the method used for the benefit of the readers.

【Solution】 Geological disasters have been explained clearly, for example, lines 43 ~ 48; The reliability of the method is described in Section 3.1

6 You mentioned a drawback in the conclusion. Is there any disadvantages or weakside of the method used.。

【Solution】Modified all

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you and best regards.

Yours sincerely: QianLiHui

E-mail: cosmicflyer@126.com

Correspondence : zsy6311@163.com

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

There is no significant suggestion within this paper no more.

The only remark is

Did the authors think about SQL database or something different? Please explain better

The references which reflect the good use of GIS and Remote methodology are

Sincerely,

The Reviewer#2

Author Response

Dear Prof:

We thank you very much again for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript (“Differentiation rule and driving mechanisms of collapse disasters in Changbai County,ID:1540749).

We have studied reviewer’s comments carefully and have made revision. We have tried to revise our manuscript again according to the comments. Attached please find the revised version, which we would like to submit for your kind consideration.

Modify the paper as required, and the framework is as follows:

Point 1 Did the authors think about SQL database or something different? Please explain better

【Response 1】 SQL statements are used because of the large amount of calculation of human activity intensity index. It is not convenient to choose Excel or other statistical software. The obtained database is imported into sqlserver2008 software platform, which has been explained clearly in the article.

Point 2 The references which reflect the good use of GIS and Remote methodology are

【Response 2】I carefully read the two articles recommended by the editorial department again, including the chapters on data processing in the paper written by the author Aleksandar Valjarević, eg: Section 3.1 (core and cartographic data analysis) and section 3.2 (GIS numerical criteria analysis) are indeed of reference value to my paper, and references are added in the second revision. In addition, some of my data did come from the website of the resources mentioned in this paper.

We would like to express our great appreciation to you and reviewers for comments on our paper. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Please see the attachment

Thank you and best regards.

Happy New Year in advance.

Yours sincerely: QianLiHui

E-mail: cosmicflyer@126.com

Correspondence : zsy6311@163.com

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

There are no new comments within this manuscript.

Sincerely,

The Reviewer#3