Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Sustainability

Assessment of Future Drought Index Using SSP Scenario in Rep. of Korea

 

Lines 40-43: please, consider reviewing the grammar of these sentences for a better comprehension of the text “In a wide range of drought definitions, a lack of precipitation causes meteorological drought, which affects soil moisture, and can be termed an agricultural drought. A small soil moisture content from the soil to rivers causes hydrological drought.”

 

Line 56: could you provide the world’s average annual precipitation in numbers for a better comprehension of the text? Reference [12].

 

Lines 110 and 116: reference [23] line 110 comes before than reference [22] line 116. Please, change order.

 

Lines 118-125: please start paragraph at line 119 with a sentence, not quoting Figure 2 directly. Figure 2 should be after the text that refers to it. Consider reviewing all the paragraph grammar and text, it is difficult to understand. Where is the solar radiation pictured in the Figure 2? Could you provide a picture with better resolution for Figure 2?

 

Line 141: review spaces between comas in “(1, 3,6,12 months, etc.)” It should be “(1, 3, 6, 12 months, etc.)”

 

Line 144: center Eq.(2) in the text, as Eq.(1), Eq.(3) and Eq.(4).

Line 137, 144, 146 and 154: equations need to be quoted in the text, as Equation (x), for a better comprehension. Equations should be placed after the quotation and before the explanation of every term of the equation. As in line 205.

 

Lines 160 and 165: references [28-29] line 160 comes before than reference [27] line 165. Please, change order.

 

Line 173, 186, 196, 201. 207: equations need to be quoted in the text, as Equation (x), for a better comprehension. Equations should be placed after the quotation and before the explanation of every term of the equation. As in line 205.

Line 190: why Eq.(6) shows “Tmean” and line 190 “T_〖mean〗”? Please, use the same terms to refer to the same.

 

Line 241: Figure 3. This figure shows the administrative districts of Korea. Please, consider adding a legend to the map, along with a north arrow indicator and a situation map to place Korea in its context. What does the red dots indicate? Consider a higher definition picture (300dpi at least). This would lead to a better comprehension of successive pictures in Fig. 8, Fig. 9, Fig. 10 and Fig. 11.

 

Line 244: quotation of Figure 3 should be before the figure.

 

Line 249: how was precipitation calculated? As an average?

 

Line 250: please, consider placing Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 right after the quote for a better comprehension of the text. This way the reader can see the picture while reading the text.

 

Line 259: where are Figures 3.1 and 3.2 in the text?

 

Line 283: “annual precipitation was 187.78” stands for mm?

 

Line 285: “long-term futures were 128.57, 147.49, and 197.93” the numbers stand for mm?

 

Line 296: “the SSP1-2.6 scenario was 0.64” stands for ºC?

 

Consider reviewing carefully all the units of precipitation and temperature in this section of the text.

 

Figures and tables from the manuscript come from a reference [37]. So, this manuscript is an original work or it is a resume or review from reference [37]. Why does the authors use this pictures and tables instead of new ones? They are all from An, S.H. master thesis, is this manuscript published?

 

Line 316: where is Table 2.1 in the text? It seems as if the authors have copied reference [37] without even reviewing the written text for this manuscript.

 

Line 374, 378, 396 and 398: why does Figures 8, 9, 10 and 11 show the weather stations as red dots? Is this relevant for the information that is being pictured in the figures?

 

Line 420 to 433: this paragraph is more likely to be in the Materials and Methods section than in Conclusions.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for your thoughtful review comments. I modified the submitted manuscript based on your major and minor revisions. Please let me know if you have any additional comments. I will do my best to improve the our manuscript.

Thank you so much.

Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study assesses the future Drought Index using the domestic drought index in the SSP1-2.6 and SSP5-8.5 scenarios in Rep. of Korea. I found the paper interesting. I believe the paper will be a good addition to sustainability journal. However, the manuscript requires some modifications . Please find more details in the second comment below.

 

Major Issues:

• Lines (137, 144, 146, and 154): Please add references to Eqs. (1,2,3, and 4).
• Line 166: Please add reference to Table 1.
• Lines (173, 186, 196, 201, and 207): Please add references to Eqs. (5,6,7,8, and 9).
• Lines (403-404): Please change the word “and that all regions had an average drought.” In to a normal condition. A value of SPI (-0.55) according to Table 1 refers to a NORMAL CONDITION. Please be precise.
• The authors should pay attention to their results and discuss about them taking into account other studies findings; therefore, I highly suggest creating a DISCUSSION SECTION to discuss and compare their results thoroughly.
• Conclusion must be rewritten highlighting the main findings of this study.

Minor Issues:

• Line 11: Please replace the word “Drought is a meteorological disaster that has great economic and environmental impacts” with “serious/significant”.
• Lines 12-13: Please rephrase “Therefore, for drought prevention, it is important to not only analyze the current state of drought using existing data, but also future droughts by considering climate change”.

We cannot prevent drought as it is a natural phenomenon!”

• Line 331: Please change the word “As indicated in Chapter 3, the average annual precipitation and temperature increased more in the SSP5-8.5 scenario than in the SSP1-2.6” into Section 3.
•  

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for your thoughtful review comments. I modified the submitted manuscript based on your major and minor revisions. Please let me know if you have any additional comments. I will do my best to improve the our manuscript.

Thank you so much.

Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Line 149: center the equation in the text as the rest of equations.

Line 208: use either Eq. (X) or Equation (X) in the text, but be consistent. Do not mix both terms. Review any other issue like this.

Please, correct this minor issues before the final version of the manuscript. Congratulations on your work.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you for your kind comments. 

We modified the manuscript using the 'Equation (X)' in the text consistently.

Thank you so much.

Best Regards

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for improving the paper!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you, we checked the style and minor spell for all text of our manuscript.

Thank you so much.

Best Regards