Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper deals with the issue of the optimal allocation of water resources based on GWAS model in Handan in China. The shortage of water resources is an important issue in global water resource management. The study focused on the novel characteristics of water resources and the distribution of water conservancy projects in Handan based on GWAS and a multi-water source, multi-user, and multi-objective water resources optimal allocation model. Comments: In what way the research results will provide a technical reference for water resource management in Handan? How you obtain the minimum water guarantee rate of the regional industrial user? Why not the lesser percentage? How you define the gurantee?Line 283: Very small Figure 2. Topological diagram of water supply and consumption in Handan. The authors did not really state what is the main difference of their work with others published in the literature. Line 84: the choice of reference should be supplemented with respect to the information system based the multi-criteria decision analysis as the preferred approach in several researches because it involves a combination of multiple criteria in a weighted way and also produces visual results, important for decisions in the urban environment (e.g. Ref. Modelling water distribution network failures and deterioration, 2017, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2017-December, 924-928. DOI 10.1109/IEEM.2017.8290027. Poor quality of the presented figures. Line 461: Very small font on the Figure 5. Proportion of water supply from different industries in each administrative district of Handan, and the Figure 4. Distribution of different water supply sources in Handan. The conclusion should be organized in such a way that it shows a summary of Authors main achievements. The conclusions  seem a repetition of results previously expressed elsewhere. Conclusions should be clear and concise and express findings of the study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. What are the limitations of your study?

2. What is the innovativeness of your study? Highlight it and include it in the introduction.

3. Abstract is vague - do revise it properly as per the context of your work

4. Give citation wherever required.

5. Compare your work and results with other researchers

6. Add latest references also so that author will get idea about current/present scenario

7. What are the assumptions you have considered

8. Have you validate the model?

9. From where the data are collected?

10. Any missing data?

 

Major revision.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is about optimal water resources allocation in Handan (China). The concept of the study is good but more introductions about indexes and models are necessary. The novelty of the paper is not clear and needs a major revision to reach the journal level. The comments are as follow:

Figures 1 and 2, have not good quality and do not presented well. The authors should prepare a good map to introduce study area well and show its complexity. A schematic flow diagram which shows water resources and demands can help. By a good schematic the authors can provide more information which are presented in Tables 2 and 3. The following paper can be used as sample, , Optimal development of agricultural sectors in the basin based on economic efficiency and social equality, Multi-objective optimization of hydro power and agricultural development at river basin scale, Water allocation using ecological and agricultural value of water. In these papers schematic figures are presented which can use.

Page 1 Line 41 to Page 3 Line 105, the introduction section must improve. The novelty of the work is not clear. At the end of introduction section (Page 5, Lines 95 to 104), you must discuss about novelty. The study related to this subject and different sustainability analysis around the world is necessary. The introduction section and literature review must improve. At the end of introduction section you must discuses about innovation of your work compared with previous works. Some paper such as, Modeling equitable and reasonable water sharing in Trans boundary Rivers: the case of river, Sustainable water resource planning at the basin scale with simultaneous goals of agricultural development and wetland conservation, Multi objective Optimization of Agricultural Planning Considering Climate Change Impacts: Reservoir Upstream Watershed in Iran can improve literature review.

Table 2, is not clear. Amount of demands and sources of water must quantify. Also, return water depends on allocated water.

Figure 4, is not well prepared. Quality of figure is poor and the presented data is not well presented. As mentioned above, please see similar papers. Instead of figures 1, 2 and 4 and Tables 2 and 3, you can present all data in a good schematic. In that figure you can show location of reservoirs, location of different demands and relation between different sources and demands. Also you can present amount of water demand and water resources in the schematic figure.

The paper is not prepared based on journal instruction for authors. There are many figures and tables which are not necessary and can be combined. Also, in methodology section authors should introduce about models. In the optimization model we must know about objective function, constraint. Also, how do you calibrate and evaluate the models? As mentioned above, using logical frame work to evaluate the relation between social index and water resources planning and management is very important. The validation of the model results is important. Do you validate your result? The methodology for selecting indexes and quantifying them and evaluation in a logical frame work is important. Statistical analysis for validation must describe.

Important note about social indexes and their relation with water resources management are discussed in conclusion. It is important that main contribution and results of the paper presented and discuss in the abstract.

Authors presented the optimal water allocation at Table 6. Please compare optimal results with current condition. What was your objective function? How do you consider environmental and social issues?

More introductions about GWAS model and preparing of that for the study area is important. Application of this model compared with similar models such as WEAP, MIKEBASIN and etc. must discussed and reason for selecting of this model should discuss at methodology section.

More discussion and sensitivity analysis on parameters and methods are necessary. Validation of data and results must discuss.

Abbreviation must present at the end of paper.

Conclusion section must improve. The mechanism of benefit sharing must discuss. How the basin managers can practically execute your suggestion?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Please provide more detailed answers to the following remarks:

The research should be designed in the appropriate way. How do you obtain the minimum water guarantee rate of the regional industrial user? Why not the lesser percentage? How do you define the guarantee? On what base it was obtained? The authors did not really state what is the main difference between their work with others published in the literature. More details should be provided about the advantages and disadvantages of this research applied to water resources management.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

the revision is appropriate..

Author Response

Thanks for your approval.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is well revised.

Author Response

Thanks for your approval.

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Unfortunately, the research is performed on many assumptions, which can not be justified from the scientific point of view, eg.  the assumption of the minimum water guarantee rate of the regional industrial user, Why not the lesser percentage? How do you define the guarantee? On what base it was obtained? 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx