Participatory Approach to Build Up a Municipal Strategy for Coastal Erosion Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper present results within the INCCA Project, which corresponds to the results of participatory workshops, including interviews and other participatory methods.

Comments

Figure 1 – axis with the corresponding coordinates are missing. The north arrow in black is difficult to distinguish, I suggest put it in white. I suggest to add a side map that covers a bigger area to facilitate the reader to situate Portugal and the study area, and also add more labels for the same purpose.

Quality of figures 2 and 4 might be improved, specially figure 4 seems blurred.  

L120 “highly threatened by coastal erosion, leading to concerning ecological consequences” this coastal erosion issue has already been addressed (for the study area), might seems repetitive… what kind of ecological consequences? Please specify.

L118 “issues related with tourism (camping, hotel)”… what kind of issues? Please specify.

L122 Does this method apply to any site? Isn’t there any restriction/limitation?

L127-130 what strategy? Also these lines seem odd, please rephrase.

L137-144 these is mentioned again in materials and methods, please revise/delete to avoid being repetitive.

An English revision is needed along the whole the ms. Some examples:

L113 “groynes and longitudinal revetment works”… better: groynes and longitudinal revetments

L118 “levels of land use”? do you mean: types of land use… ?

L155 “moments”? do you mean something like: stages… ?

L186 odd sentence

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank you for the detailed corrections and suggestions provided, and as such, have revised the paper accordingly. Based on the detailed and constructive feedback provided, the paper has been significantly improved. Please find our detailed response to the reviewer’s comments in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Matos and colleagues provide the case study of the INCCA project was located in this area (http://incca.web.ua.pt/) and involves stakeholders with technical, scientific and operational knowledge to jointly manage coastal areas. Within the framework of participation in project development, five participatory activities were held involving local authorities, civil protection, public entities, academia and the general community. These activities enabled a multidisciplinary and multi-stakeholder analysis of the challenges and possible solutions for coastal erosion mitigation, representing the definition of a shared vision for the future of the city's coastline. Finally, it is essential to define modern coastal adaptation strategies to minimize the impacts of these issues on the local communities, while considering social, environmental and economic factors. The English is in relatively good shape, but some places need some improvements (please see my comments about rephrasing below). Overall, I have a couple of suggestions, and therefore ask for revision (minor) before accepting this manuscript for JMSE. So, please take them into account in order this promising contribution to be publishable. The manuscript is acceptable with minor revision.

Minor Comments and Suggestions:

1. L96: Explains why the decision of INCCA Project can solve coastal erosion mitigation and adaptation in Chapter 1.

2. L105: Adjust Section 1.1 to go to Chapter 2, or briefly introduce the INCCA Project in Chapter 1.

3. Set up several subsections in Chapter 2, including Section 2.1, that categorize the issues that need to be addressed in this chapter.

4. The core outcome of each meeting needs to be identified in each subsection of Chapter 3.

5. Is there a scientific formula that can be used to calculate or predict how much coastal erosion the INCCA Project will reduce in the future?

6. Professional evaluation of adaptive coastal erosion management strategies through multiple rounds of meetings to determine whether they have been successful in other countries or institutions. The author can make a comparative study of the successful cases in the discussion section.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank you for the detailed corrections and suggestions provided, and as such, have revised the paper accordingly. Based on the detailed and constructive feedback provided, the paper has been significantly improved. Please find our detailed response to the reviewer’s comments in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Please see the attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We thank you for the detailed corrections and suggestions provided, and as such, have revised the paper accordingly. Based on the detailed and constructive feedback provided, the paper has been significantly improved. Please find our detailed response to the reviewer’s comments in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf