Review Reports
by
- Ploutarchos Tzampoglou 1,*,
- Ioanna Ilia 2,* and
- Wei Chen 4
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Vishakha Sood Reviewer 2: Abdol Rassoul Zarei Reviewer 3: Al Mamun Reviewer 4: Niyaz Mohammad Mahmoodi
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors have shown the review of "Selected worldwide cases of land subsidence due to ground water withdrawal". The review report generated is very sound and effective. A very good number of literature papers have shown. In order to enhance the scope of the manuscript, the following points could be considered.
1.The abstract needs to be reframed and must consider the following points
a) statement of the problem your research addresses
b) What are the research gaps
c) Why is it important to address these questions
d) the significance or implications of your findings
2. Introduction section could be improved by incorporating more literature part. Generally, it may include four paragraphs, a brief overview, literature, the research gap and the objectives of the study. Currently, it is very concisely combined together.
3.Define the objectives as “The major objectives of the study included (a)…; (b)….” In the last paragraph of the Introduction.
4.The table 1 can be more enhanced/elaborated e.g data set used, drawbacks/gaps etc.
5. The Concluding remarks must be reframed by showing future scope of the study
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Hello. I thank the authors for their efforts in collecting information.
I think the presented paper is a scientific report and has not any novelty or new scientific results. I do not recommend publishing this form of article.
therefore I want to reject it.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached file herein.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments:
0. Moderate revision. 1. The novelty of this study should be inserted in the text clearly. 2. The advantages and disadvantages of this study should be investigated. 3. The “discussion” section of the manuscript can be strengthened and supported with some papers related to the literature.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf