Community-Based Approaches to Debris Flow Hazard Analysis in the Sibillini Mountain Range (Central Apennines, Italy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review report for article with Manuscript ID: sustainability-2785663

 

The current review is on the article “Sustainable and Community-based Approaches for the natural hazard of the Debris flows in the Sibillini mountain range (Central Apennines, Italy)”. Qualification of human life was and still is the driving force for many technological developments. The aims mentioned in this article, including the decline in the risk of hazards and natural phenomena, preserving the landscape, conserving natural resources, etc., are fascinating, especially with the significant impacts of recent natural hazards on the region.

Therefore, in the following, some examples indicate the issues requiring improvements and comments.

-             Although presenting a very stimulating story, seemingly because the researchers have touched on several subjects and aimed at many objectives, nothing was deeply studied or presented with sufficient scientific arguments and evidence. The former means the core and the main goal are not sharply and distinctly identified and backed up with adequate research.

-             On page 2, lines 78 and 79 did not thoroughly study their background since there are numerous research available in the field,

-             On a holistic analysis, the significant and multiple effects of global warming have not been directly realised as a particular and more recent impacting phenomenon, except the minor indication on the last sentence of the third paragraph of page 4, lines 145,146, and 147, which is yet the effect of climate, not the historical climate change.   

-             On many occasions, the use of evidence (e.g., literature and references) is advisable (e.g., on page 4, second paragraph, lines 128- 134),

-             It seems that the researchers are overlooking advanced technologies (e.g., on page 2, lines 80, 81, and 82; on page 3, figure 1; page 4, page 5, etc.), available for measurements and observation (e.g., drone observation qualities and data transformation and transferring, satellite records and observations, etc.,) here, but only GIS,

-             Lacking processed data/information and thoroughly analysed images is sensible, whereas only raw images are provided, 

 

-             Minor grammatical and English editing (e.g., from the title on page 1 to the first and second paragraph of page 14) are recommendable, 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It's a true story for which an interesting plan has been provided. However, the article needs considerable work to reach a standard journal publication level.  

Author Response

Dear revisor, thank you for your suggestions. We inform you that we upload the new revised version.

Comment 1

The issue of the study of debris flows affecting the Apennines has been discussed, both on the basis of their geomorphological and historical-chronological characteristics, in order to highlight their hazards and the risk associated with them also with respect to the effects of climatic changes.

In addition, an attempt was made to initiate an action of knowledge and dissemination of the hazard of debris flows but, due to the COVID period crossed, it was only for now possible to devise a roadmap to organize later.

Comment 2

It was specified that the study was aimed only at the Sibillini Mountains area since research on debris flows is vast, but most of it is focused on hydrodynamic rather than morphological aspects. Eight citations have been included which are also referred to for their bibliography contained in them.

Comment 3

The paragraph was corrected by highlighting the role of climate as the primary cause of debris flows activation. An attempt has also been made to highlight how possible reactivations are related to recent climate changes anyway.

Comment 4

Ok. Modified according to the proposed comments.

Comment 5

Ok. Modified according to the proposed comments.

Comment 6

Unfortunately, images with higher resolution cannot be provided.

Comment 7

A review of the entire article was conducted.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study deals with the debris flows, their geomorphological characteristics, and the hazards of these phenomena in the Sibillini mountain range of the Italian Central Apennines. At first, the authors concentrate on the geological framework and the climatic situation of the area to move then over to a detailed geomorphological survey of the phenomena supported by statistical analysis with the help of GIS tools [heading 2.3: Techical support!!]. This led then to a descriptive statistical analysis of the geomorphological features of the investigated debris flows, of which 70% are still active and 30% dormant [Figure 5: some of the colors of the graphs are so close to each other so that one cannot recognize differences]. Perhaps the most interesting part of the study is the influence of debris flows on the population of the area and their basis of existence, starting with a historical overview. The authors finally state that their article can be seen as a first step to cope with the hazards of debris flows in the Sibillini mountain area and that “the assumptions and results of the present study can therefore provide useful elements for planning purposes in terms of design and implementation of adequate mitigation and territorial safeguard interventions.” They have, among others, to be connected with dissemination, that is, education of local people, spreading knowledge and awareness of the hazard and difficult predictability of events, and getting acquainted with adequate warning modes. Altogether, I think that the study offers a number of important results on debris flows and their hazards which are not only relevant for the Sibillini mountain range area.

Author Response

Dear revisor, thank you for your suggestions. We inform you that we upload the new revised version.

Comment 1

The heading “2.3: Techical support” has been modified.

The colours of the graphs unfortunately cannot be corrected. The technical support aspect has been further detailed. Dissemination and information to the population has also been covered on page 13 in paragraph n. 5. Discussion section and has been extended.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Please provide a roadmap for proposed method.

2. The quality of Table 1 is weak.

3. Please modift the section of "2. Case study" in detail.

4. Please provide a table for the "2.3. Techical Support" and mention all of the applied elements.

 

Good Luck!

Author Response

Dear revisor, thank you for your suggestions. We inform you that we upload the new revised version.

Comment 1

Modified according to the proposed comments.

Comment 2

The table has been edited in the requested template.

Comment 3

It was specified that the study was aimed only at the Sibillini Mountains area since research on debris flows is vast but most of it is focused on hydrodynamic rather than morphological aspects. Eight citations have been included which are also referred to for their bibliography contained in them.

Furthermore, the title of the section “2” was modified in “Debris flows phenomena in the Sibillini Mountains”.

Comment 4

The technical support aspect was further detailed, with the addition of a roadmap to explain the procedure used in the research.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article has been modified!