Sustainable Silt Management in the Lower Kosi River, North Bihar, India: Demand Assessment, Investment Model and Socio-Economic Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper focuses on addressing the issue of excessive sediment deposition in the Lower Kosi River and proposes sustainable sediment management strategies. However, there are areas that require improvement for the paper to be published successfully:

1. Lack of methodology details in the abstract: The abstract lacks specific information about the methodology employed in the study. It is important to assess the scientific rigor, data collection methods, and analysis techniques used in the research to ensure credibility and reliability.

2. Insufficient information on hotspot identification: While the approach used for hotspot identification, considering the spatial and temporal variability of sediment deposition, seems reasonable, the abstract should provide more specific details about the methods used to calculate the bar area and channel area from the planform maps. This additional information would enhance the assessment of the methodology's effectiveness.

3. Inadequate information on sediment volume estimation: The abstract mentions that sediment volume estimation is based on sound principles, combining hydrological data and planform analysis. However, it lacks specific calculations and assumptions made during the sediment thickness and volume estimation process. Providing these details would allow for a more comprehensive evaluation of the study's findings in this regard.

4. Insufficient details on economic viability and financial analysis: The investment model for silt management is considered practical, utilizing dredged silt for construction purposes. However, the abstract lacks in-depth information about the economic viability, cost to benefit ratio, and financial analysis, including the underlying assumptions and methodologies employed. Providing these details would strengthen the assessment of the proposed strategies.

5. Need for additional information on methodologies and assumptions: While the paper presents valuable information on the hydrogeomorphic study of the Kosi River, including hotspot identification and sediment volume estimation, it would benefit from additional information regarding specific methodologies, calculations, and assumptions. This additional information would contribute to a more thorough evaluation of the study's findings and the proposed investment model.

6. Limited adequacy of references: Although the provided references cover relevant topics related to sediment management, river dynamics, and environmental impacts, their suitability for studying sustainable silt management in the Lower Kosi River, North Bihar, India may be limited. Expanding the reference list to include sources specifically focusing on demand assessment, investment models, and socio-economic development in the study area would enhance the paper's relevance and comprehensiveness.

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. We have addressed all your suggestions.

Rajiv Sinha

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I read the manuscript titled " Sustainable silt management in the Lower Kosi River, North  Bihar, India: demand assessment, investment model and socioeconomic development. The comments are as follow, which the dear author should do them. After answering the comments, I would like to review. In my opinion, the manuscript needs major revision.

1- Several formatting errors were observed throughout the text and references.

2- Improve abstract part. The abstract should contain Objectives, Methods/Analysis, Findings, and Novelty /Improvement.

3- At the end of the introduction, introduce the novelty of your study and mention the organization of your paper.

4- Can the authors provide better quality of Figure 1?

5- It would be necessary to review the English to improve the quality of the text.

6- Why does the bar area alone cannot be used to identify the hotspots of siltation?

7- How was the measurement of the sediment?

8- Use the following papers in the manuscript:

https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2022.354

https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids7070244

9- The conclusion should be revised.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. We have incorporated all your suggestions in the revised manuscript.

Rajiv Sinha

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Overall, the paper is well-structured and follows a logical progression. The organization of sections aids in understanding the flow of ideas. However, in some instances, the transitions between sections could be smoother to enhance the overall readability. I appreciate the authors' dedication to this research and their willingness to contribute to the academic community.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

 We thank you for your insightful comments. I have attached my response to the comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

Please find attached the file with my corrections and suggestions.

Sincerely,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your insightful comments. I have attached my response to the comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

Please find attached my further comments and recommendations.

Sincerely,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the detailed response to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf