The Social Side of Biodiversity Loss: A Review of Individual, Collective, and Structural Drivers in Coastal Regions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reviewing report

Manuscript entitled " The Social Side of Biodiversity Loss: A Review of Individual, and Structural Drivers in Coastal Regions"

The work seems good but need some corrections: 

  

1. The 4 authors are from the same institute. So, Why you divide it to 4 numbers ?
2. Line 29, please remove «;« here :  Socio-demographic Factors;
3. Where are your references in the introduction part ?
4. Please, highlight the importance of coastal regions in the introduction part .

Then, briefly define biodiversity loss

5. Mention the impact of biodiversity loss on coastal communities' livelihoods, cultural heritage, and overall well-being in the introduction
6. This numbering is false « 2.5 Education 339 «

The same « 3.2.7 Education for Sustainable Development in Teacher Education 521 «

7. You need to make the biodiversity concept diagram

For help see : Heydari, M., Omidipour, R., & Greenlee, J. (2020). Biodiversity, a review of the concept, measurement, opportunities, and challenges. Journal of Wildlife and Biodiversity, 4(4), 26-39.

8. Where are the biodiversity hot spot regions discussion
9. Where your talk about climate change. You need to make thsi as a subtitle

For help see : Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. (2009). Review of the literature on the links between biodiversity and climate change: impacts, adaptation, and mitigation.

10. Under microlevel factors you need to talk about « knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding coastal biodiversity « 
11. Please hint about what is the menaing of « micro level«. Is that «Individual-Level Drivers?\
12. You need to talk about : genetic diversity, land-use change, insecticides, marine plastic pollution and microplastics, harvesting materials from oceans, desertification,

for help see this « hald-mortensen, c. (2023). the main drivers of biodiversity loss: a brief overview. Journal of Ecology and Natural Resources, 7(3), 000346. « 

13. How you named this subtitle « 2 Contradictory Findings and Research Gaps 954 « Then you mentioned research gaps here again « 4.3 Research Gaps: The Absence of Theory 1028 « ?
14. You need to add additional subtitle about « the interplay between individual actions and meso-level structure « 
15. The role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) needed to be as individual subtitle under meso factors with detailed discussion.
16. Under macro factors subtitle you need to make subtitles about » climate change and its differential social impacts on coastal biodiversity»
17. Please when you mention a reference such as « Pierre Bourdieu’s (1986) « but his number in the end of the sentence. Please revise the whole manuscript about this issue.

 

GOOD LUCK

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Line 116: Explain micro-, meso-, and macro-level perspectives.
2. Lines 139-188: The current section presents conflicting findings. Need clarify these discrepancies and consider discussing how regional or cultural contexts may moderate age-related trends.

3. Lines 204–273 contain limited literature specifically related to coastal areas.
4. Given that ecological conservation attitudes are often closely linked to economic development, education, and cultural context, it is recommended that the authors categorize the literature by region, country, or income level to enhance the clarity and depth of cross-context comparisons.
5. Need add figure or table to visually summarize and compare the reviewed studies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In “The Social Side of Biodiversity Loss,” Yendell et al. review the literature about how social, cultural, political, and psychological factors impact views of biodiversity loss as well as how to address it.  They claim to focus on coastal systems but my impression is that they are placing an unnecessary constraint on their results. That is, their review is appropriate far beyond coastal populations and ecosystems.

The authors divide factors contributing to biodiversity conservation into micro-meso-and macro-level perspectives, and in so doing, cover all levels of social factors that constrain or encourage conservation. This approach alone justifies publishing this work. As with all reviews, their goal was to coalesce what we already know into one convenient source. They then use this information to identify gaps in our knowledge and where more research is needed to reach consensus. Perhaps most important, however, they decry the lack of an existing theoretical framework that explains why certain patterns emerge or vary across contexts. The authors feel that such a framework is needed to design conservation strategies that are not only ecologically sound but socially and culturally effective. They close their review with the beginnings of such a framework.

Although this is only my area of expertise peripherally, the authors not only convinced me that more empirical research and theory are needed to improve societal responses to biodiversity loss, but they also provided a robust review of our current knowledge. I have no substantive criticisms of their approach. Picky comments might include a bit too much repetition and heavy use of jargon which may limit its usefulness to non-sociologists.   Otherwise, it is very well written.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reviewing report

Review entitled "The Social Side of Biodiversity Loss: A Review of Individual, Collective, and Structural Drivers in Coastal Regions"

1. There are many places need reference. For example the first paragraph in the introductio. Please revise well this issue. There are other paragaraphs missed references.
2. Please combine the first two paragraphs in the introduction as 1 paragraph.
3. There is a bold line in the conclusion please correct it.
4. Are you suer the refrencing style is by name not by numbering ?
5. « Salinasatation« in figure 1. There is a line under the word in figure 1. Please remove.
6. The style of figure 1 caption is itslic ? Are you sure ? 

 

GOOD LUCK

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf