A Methodological Tool to Assess Erosion Susceptibility of High Coastal Sectors: Case Studies from Campania Region (Southern Italy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Summary

 

This article proposes a methodological approach to assess the susceptibility to erosion of high coastal sectors using a combination of two matrices: one representing the physical elements and the other, the forcing elements. The parameters for the two matrices are selected based on the existing literature, and the susceptibility matrix is obtained via interpolation. The proposed method is applied to Procida Island and Cilento promontory, Italy, and the results are compared with the real data obtained using aerial photographs and satellite images. The analysis calls for increased monitoring efforts and protective action at high-susceptibility class locations.

 

 

 Comments: The manuscript content is very relevant and clear. The experimental design can be improved. Some specific comments and suggestions are the following.

 

 

• Line No. 171: Coastal Forcing Index is denoted as (FCIx) it is denoted as CFIx in most places.
• In line no. 181, the classes seem to be incorrect. From the latter part, it seems there are 5 in PSIx and 3 in CFIx
• The subjectiveness and difficulty in determining the weight factor are mentioned, which is good. The number of factors considered also seems to be good.
• Equations 1, 2, and 3 need to be written in a better way without using images.
• Even though the Index criteria are well-defined, only the results using the collected data are provided. Graphical (plots) or tabular representations of the collected data would be a good addition.
• Table 1 spelling mistake: very ‘high’.
• The susceptibility evaluation equation is claimed to be representing the probability of occurrence, which may not be accurately represented because of the qualitative nature of the study. The susceptibility equation (3) equation can be improved, especially with the low adjusted  R^2 value of 0.56. For example, if a weightage factor W with a value between 0 and 1 is added to the numerator equation  W(PEI x nPEI)+(1-W)(CFI x nCFI), could the model be improved? The W can be then by optimizing the adjusted R^2 value. In short, the model was created but could be improved to fit better.
• In the index validation section, 4.4, neither the estimated Cliff Retreat Rate data nor the actual function which was used is presented. The addition of these elements is suggested.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

thank you so much for your useful comments and suggestions, we carried out all of them. Please see added/corrected red stuff in the new version of the manuscript and the attached  response letter.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Under the present accelerated sea-level rise scenario, the landforms are suffering huge impacts in terms of erosion. Combining climate change and sea level rising will lead to higher rates of erosion of high coastal sectors. The manuscript entitled “A methodological tool to assess erosion susceptibility of high coastal sectors: case studies from Campania region” proposal of a new methodological approach for the assessment of their susceptibility to erosive processes. Several variables were selected to construct each one of the two matrices according to existing studies. The research found that the greater part of the analyzed high coastal sector belongs to the high-susceptibility class. I think the manuscript should be accepted after minor revision.

 

Specific comments.

 

In the Introduction, there are too many paragraph. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

thank you so much for your useful comments and suggestions, we carried out all of them. Please see added/corrected red stuff in the new version of the manuscript and the attached  response letter.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx