Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The author has done a good job. The article is easy to read and will be of interest to international readership

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

please find my reply in the attachment.

Kind regards,

Małgorzata Gawlik-Kobylińska

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is very interesting, the topic is very important nowadays, I believe that the research carried out was good, however I think that the number of articles researched to build an analysis about innovations related to CBRN threats is small. I suggest a broader review, I don't think there are less than 300 works in this area of expertise. Have advances in monitoring radiation and radioactive waste from nuclear power plants been accounted for? I also suggest a review of English grammar and some words are misspelled, like Chornobyl, instead of Chernobyl.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

please find my reply in the attachment.

Kind regards,

Małgorzata Gawlik-Kobylińska

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript contributes to the sustainable development landscape. The title does not reflect the content of the manuscript. The author may revise the title accordingly. Not all aspects as mentioned in the manuscript are all related to innovations, some related to current issues and the title need to be inline with the direction of the manuscript. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

please find my reply in the attachment.

Kind regards,

Małgorzata Gawlik-Kobylińska

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

After corrections made, the article, in my opnion,  can be accepted.