Health Impact Assessment from Rice Straw Production in Cambodia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study analyzed the health impact from rice straw production in Cambodia, which enriches the research on the impact of biomass combustion on the environment and health to a certain extent. It has certain theoretical and practical value. The proposed assessment model is scientific and the conclusion is credible. However, it has some contents that need to be modified:

1. It only expounds the significance from the practical point of view and lacks the necessary literature review, which makes it difficult to give scientific significance and lacks innovation basis.

2. The explanation of formula (2) is not clear. Where is N0? The meaning of alpha and the value of P are not clearly explained. It is suggested that the author should further clarify it according to the statistical sampling formula.

3. In Table 1, where does the data come from? There is no corresponding literature.

4. The data in line 179 is unreasonable: 3.40e + 02, 2.30e + 01, 2.90e + 01, and 1.60e + 02. It is not recommended to use scientific counting method.

5. "Interview and (QN)" in Table 2 should be "interview and QN"

6. In line 188, ” we conducted a field survey in three provinces in Cambodia, we selected 70 188 farmers in Prey Veng, Svay Rieng, and Kampong Thom”. Why did the author choose these three provinces and 70 farmers? Does it meet the requirements of statistics? How to select the corresponding formula (2)? This issue is related to the reference of future researchers, and the authors must give a clear explanation.

7. The research in this paper should also give appropriate interval or sensitivity analysis results. If a value is simply given, it may only be an expected value or an average value. It is suggested that the author should supplement and at least give a statement of the confidence of the results.

8. It is suggested to add the innovation of this article in the conclusion and list the specific points of future research in order to increase the interest of readers.

9. If the latest data is available, it is suggested to replace the data in the introduction, such as the rice consumption data in 2018.

10. There are big language and grammar problems in the paper. It is suggested to find professionals or institutions to revise it.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript Number; applsci-1894751

Title; Health Impact Assessment from Rice Straw Production in Cambodia

Although the topic is of interest to the Scientific community, before considering it for publication, this paper should be improved. Authors should reconsider the main objective of the paper according to the content. They should try to synthesize and emphasize the study's main findings and avoid long sentences. Furthermore, authors should avoid drawing risky conclusions.

Evaluation; Major Revision.

1. Abstract; Many numeric data are given with too many significant figures; 2 significant figures suffice and 3 suffice in case the first significant figure is "1".

2.     Abstract should be revised, must reduce the methodology.

3.   Keywords; Must to revised; spelling and avoiding general and plural terms abbreviation and multiple concepts.

Unsuitable >>> DALYs, 

                           Health Impact, Assessment?   Health Impact Assessment

4.  Line 78-80; In Cambodia, rice straw is widely available and low in value. Without proper treatment, rice straw is left to burn in the field. After harvest, roughly 10 million tons of rice straw are produced in Cambodia, of which 3 million tons are burned.

Please add the references.  This is the mean fraction burn in the field. Each province should be different.

5.     Materials and Methods.

Why does the author use European Environmental Agency (EMEP/EEA) guidelines for emission Inventory analysis?

Specific to the Emission Factor (EFs) and other default values, each crop species can have a different EF, resulting in uncertainty. Country-specific EFs are needed to reduce uncertainty. In this study, EFs from Cambodia estimate EIs. When EFs or default parameters are unavailable in Cambodia, it should prefer EFs from other Asian countries, followed by others depending on the similar climate and crop cultivation.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

HI

dear editor

many thanks for send this MS

MS have good noveltly and technical scientefice points

my suggested is minor revision

best regards

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors made modifications based on the comments, which improved the persuasiveness of the paper, made the conclusion more credible, and the research process has better reference value. However, there is still a problem with the expression of some words. For example, line 101 should be "In recent years" rather than "I". The authors should revise these questions carefully.