The Umlindi Newsletter: Disseminating Climate-Related Information on the Management of Natural Disaster and Agricultural Production in South Africa

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is very interesting. It is very useful to generate information for the general public and make it available in a simple and summarized way. The objective is clear and there is no doubt that a portal with relevant information on the condition of precipitation, fires and vegetation will be very useful. However, the authors must value this great effort and validate their information.

1.- The authors do not specify the methodology used to construct the precipitation database. It is not clear whether the data was solely sourced from satellites or if other methods werw wmployed. Futhermore, the specific satellite product used for precipitation data remains unspecified, and there is not mention of any adjustment or validation methods with ground stations. It is very important to provide users with quality information.

2.- In the vegetation section, it displays formulas for NDVI, but the formulas for other vegetation condition indicators are missing. Considering that these indices pertain to vegetation condition, it might also be worthwhile to include the soil moisture index, as it could complement the information for areas experiencing drought, low precipitation, or potentially signal favorable conditions for forest fires.

3.- The surface water resources, this is a section that is not clear. the authors could explain whether they conducted a water balance or how they determined this availability. Please describe clearly how this value is obtained; the percentage units are not clear to me. If possible, it could be indicated when there are areas of concern, whether they are positive or negative, meaning floods and droughts.

4.-  Regarding the portal, the first presentation page could have a map displaying the main cities, rivers, irrigation districts, and protected natural areas. These base maps would only be colored at the beginning to avoid overwhelming the other thematic maps but would serve to guide users to areas and topics of interest.

 5.-  In the final section of the newsletter it seems that some collaborators offer additional services, it is not clear to me if this newsletter is from a private or public company, and if so, how it ensures its permanence and operation.

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 1

The manuscript is very interesting. It is very useful to generate information for the general public and make it available in a simple and summarized way. The objective is clear and there is no doubt that a portal with relevant information on the condition of precipitation, fires and vegetation will be very useful. However, the authors must value this great effort and validate their information.

Thank you for your valuable thoughts. As suggested, we will validate our information further as has been specified in the comments below.

1.- The authors do not specify the methodology used to construct the precipitation database. It is not clear whether the data was solely sourced from satellites or if other methods were employed. Furthermore, the specific satellite product used for precipitation data remains unspecified, and there is not mention of any adjustment or validation methods with ground stations. It is very important to provide users with quality information.

Response:

Thank you for this valuable comment, and especially for highlighting the need for a reader to understand how the precipitation dataset was constructed. Towards providing more detail regarding this, we note that the details of the methods of this data construction are provided in Malherbe et al. (2016), and we include information of the satellite data utilised to create the surfaces. The revisions for this follow on line 129-136. We do not provide further detail as our paper is more strongly focused on the dissemination of climatic information through the Umlindi newsletter, and our information will be repetitive of what is detailed in Malherbe et al. (2016).

2.- In the vegetation section, it displays formulas for NDVI, but the formulas for other vegetation condition indicators are missing. Considering that these indices pertain to vegetation condition, it might also be worthwhile to include the soil moisture index, as it could complement the information for areas experiencing drought, low precipitation, or potentially signal favorable conditions for forest fires.

Response

Thank you for the valuable comments. The formulas for other vegetation condition indicators are added in the revised manuscript see line 173-194. The inclusion of the soil moisture index is on the list of priorities within the ARC for operational purposes, and should be added in the improved version of the newsletter in the near future. 

3.- The surface water resources, this is a section that is not clear. The authors could explain whether they conducted a water balance or how they determined this availability. Please describe clearly how this value is obtained; the percentage units are not clear to me. If possible, it could be indicated when there are areas of concern, whether they are positive or negative, meaning floods and droughts.

Response:  

Thank you for the valuable comment. Towards providing more detail regarding this, the statement: “This information service has been developed and operationalised by GeoTerraImage, and generates monthly updated, national coverage raster datasets that illustrates and spatially quantifies the location and extent of all surface water features, across South Africa, irrespective of whether they are natural or man-made. The service data repository contains monthly surface water datasets for all months, back to January 2016, which is the operational source date of Sentinel-2 imagery, on which the service capability is based.

 The time-based comparisons of current monthly water extents are compared to the long-term monthly data histories, to derive both the annual and long-term water resource status comparisons. The surface water features are expressed as percentage, which represents the percentage extent in relation to the average extent for the data since 2016. The annual comparison represents the current target month, compared to the same month in the previous year. The annual comparisons, any value less than 100 represents water catchments within which the current month’s total surface water is less than the maximum extent recorded for the same area since the end of 2015. The long-term comparison represents the current target month compared to the long-term maximum (based on all monthly records back to January 2016). The long-term comparison, any value less than 100 represents water catchments within which the current month’s total surface water is less than that recorded in the same water catchment, in the same month, in 2022. All comparisons are reported in terms of tertiary-level water catchment boundaries” has been added in the revised manuscript, see line 195-213.

The statement “This Sentinel-based water detection and mapping method has been validated through participation in the European Space Agency’s Global Water Round Robin programme (Surface Water Dynamics from Space: A Round Robin. Intercomparison of Using Optical and SAR High-Resolution Satellite Observations for Regional Surface Water Detection (Tottrup et al, 2022)”, is also added in the revised manuscript, see line 227-230. This is also to provide additional detail for the dataset.

4.-  Regarding the portal, the first presentation page could have a map displaying the main cities, rivers, irrigation districts, and protected natural areas. These base maps would only be colored at the beginning to avoid overwhelming the other thematic maps but would serve to guide users to areas and topics of interest.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. We will utilise this information to improve on the presentation of the Umlindi newsletter, which is not currently a digital or online portal. Given its current format, it does not incorporate interactive maps or digital features on the first page. The current design is a traditional layout that ensures that our readers can access vital information concerning most recent weather events and their implications for agriculture. However, we remain open to exploring ways to enhance the accessibility and function of our newsletter within the confines of its existing format.

5.-  In the final section of the newsletter it seems that some collaborators offer additional services, it is not clear to me if this newsletter is from a private or public company, and if so, how it ensures its permanence and operation.

Response

Thank you for the valuable comment. The newsletter is from a public entity, namely the ARC. This is emphasised in the Introduction, see line 66-74 in the revised manuscript. The additional collaborators are added to offer additional services that complement the existing products offered by the ARC, allowing the newsletter to offer a wider range of products and services to the public.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Your paper should be improved as I listed above.You should also update the cited references.

It need more improvement,especially in presentation of the results and data analysis.

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 2

Your paper should be improved as I listed above. You should also update the cited references.

Improve the introduction and provide sufficient background and update the cited references

Response

Thank you for the valuable comment. As part of improving the introduction, the statement “Here, we provide a sample of the Umlindi newsletter through an overview of the drought conditions in South Africa to demonstrate the application of the developed indicators and indices for decision-making in the disaster management and agricultural sectors.” has been added in the revised manuscript. See line 75-80. Towards providing further background, we believe that our introduction sections sufficiently highlight first the need for a tool disseminating climate information, and second we provide a background of the dissemination tool we present, being the Umlindi newsletter. Thus, we do not provide further detail towards a background. Throughout the Material and Methods, from line 128-230, additional detail has been added to improving this section.

Towards updating the cited references, we believe that the references we have used most appropriately describe the case study event we are using towards discussing the Umlindi newsletter, and they are recent references towards presenting on climate services. In addition, all the relevant references were formatted according to the Climate journal in the revised manuscript. See the entire manuscript.

The Quality of English Language. It need more improvement, especially in presentation of the results and data analysis.

Thank you for the valuable comment. The quality of the English Language has been improved in the revised manuscript, see the entire manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In the attached file are some specific observations.

In general there are several points to consider:

1. The information presented does not have the structure for a scientific article, the data must be presented as a communication or brief report that synthesizes the description, methods and presentation of the climate magazine.

2. In the magazine I suggest to present all the data obtained from climate stations  and/ or data derived from satellite images (rainfall, temperature, wind direction, radiation, transpiration), and a section with product derived from these original data and the monitoring of climatic phenomena (drought, floods, fires). Also I suggest adding a practical use or interpretation of the data presented, in order to make the information understandable for any type of audience.

3. It is necessaryto follow the citation rules, numbering in the text for every reference.

4. The results describe events that are not mention in the objectives of the paper. 

In general the proposal and intention of the data is good,, I think it should be complemented and presented in another format, but not as a scientific article. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 3

In the attached file are some specific observations. In general there are several points to consider:

1- The information presented does not have the structure for a scientific article; the data must be presented as a communication or brief report that synthesizes the description, methods, and presentation of the climate magazine.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. We believe the original structure of the article should be retained given that the other two reviewers have not indicated any problems with the structure. In addition, the content of the Newsletter is derived from a combination of various data sources collected and analysed in a scientific manner as described in the manuscript.

2- In the magazine I suggest to present all the data obtained from climate stations  and/ or data derived from satellite images (rainfall, temperature, wind direction, radiation, transpiration), and a section with product derived from these original data and the monitoring of climatic phenomena (drought, floods, fires). Also I suggest adding a practical use or interpretation of the data presented, in order to make the information understandable for any type of audience.

Response:  

Thank you for the valuable comment. We value it towards the improvement of our Umlindi newsletter. The data obtained from climate stations and satellite images are indeed utilized to derive valuable products and indices. Each figure in the newsletter is accompanied by detailed information that ensures readers can understand and interpret the information effectively.

3- It is necessary to follow the citation rules, numbering in the text for every reference.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The citation and references have been formatted according to the rules of the Climate Journal in the revised manuscript, see the entire manuscript.

4- The results describe events that are not mention in the objectives of the paper.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. We now list these in the Background section of the Introduction:

“Here, we provide a sample of the Umlindi newsletter using various examples, considering: 1) Recent drought conditions over the country through the lens of rainfall and vegetation data; 2) A recent view of the status of the country’s water resources; and 3) a view of the seasonal occurrence of wild fires.” See line 72-80 in the revised manuscript.

5 - In general the proposal and intention of the data is good, I think it should be complemented and presented in another format, but not as a scientific article.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. We believe the original structure of the article should be retained given that the other two reviewers have not indicated any problems with the structure. In addition, the content of the Newsletter is derived from a combination of various data sources collected and analysed in a scientific manner as described in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Abstract

Please take the website link from the abstract. It should be inserted in the main text.

Line 24: I do not think pest infestation is a natural disaster.

Lines 26 to 28: In what way(s) can the Umlindi newsletter be insightful to the global scientific community for developing and disseminating natural resources information? Is there anything that makes the process of developing and disseminating natural resources information unique to Umlindi newsletter compared to the way some international organisations provide such information to the wider public?

Introduction

Lines 59 – 60: When you say lack of data, is there a region specifically you’re referring to? There are various regions in Sub-Saharan Africa where studies have shown that farmers rely on climate services to make informed decisions. Or perhaps, are you referring to a different data? Please be specific and back it up with references.

The introduction seems to end on a shaky note because the objective of this paper is not stated. Kindly add the purpose why this paper is written.

Section 1.2.

When you say in a simplified manner that decision-makers and others can understand and utilize, has a study been conducted by the ARC to seek how easily the climate information provided are easily understood by its end-users? I ask because climate scientists may like to think that the information they provide is easily understood, but it may not necessarily be the case. If there’s a study that has been conducted, kindly reference it.

In the absence of no study to back this up, kindly re-write along the lines of…in a simplified manner that hopefully decision-makers,….should be able to easily understand and utilize.

Section 1.3.

I would suggest you include a table that shows the number of weather stations in each province where weather-related information is obtained.

Section 3.

Kindly separate the results from the discussion. This is necessary to ensure that the findings are robustly discussed. In the discussion, I would like the author(s) to shed light on the uniqueness of the newsletter, which I believe would be of key interest to the global audience.

Author Response

Replies to reviewer comments – Reviewer 4

Abstract

Please take the website link from the abstract. It should be inserted in the main text.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The website link has been retracted in the revised manuscript, see line 15-16.

Line 24: I do not think pest infestation is a natural disaster.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The words “pest infestation” were retracted in the revised manuscript see line 26

Lines 26 to 28: In what way(s) can the Umlindi newsletter be insightful to the global scientific community for developing and disseminating natural resources information? Is there anything that makes the process of developing and disseminating natural resources information unique to Umlindi newsletter compared to the way some international organisations provide such information to the wider public?

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The statement “While international organizations also provide natural resource information, the Umlindi newsletter may be distinguished by its regional focus and linkages to individual communities. It bridges the gap between global environmental data and local decision-making by illustrating how global scientific knowledge may be applied locally.” Has been added in the revised manuscript to provide emphasis on the ways in which the Umlindi can be insightful to global scientific community, see line 30-34.

Introduction

Lines 59 – 60: When you say lack of data, is there a region specifically you’re referring to? There are various regions in Sub-Saharan Africa where studies have shown that farmers rely on climate services to make informed decisions. Or perhaps, are you referring to a different data? Please be specific and back it up with references.

The introduction seems to end on a shaky note because the objective of this paper is not stated. Kindly add the purpose why this paper is written.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. As for the lack of data point, we have changed this to say limited data because saying lack of data implies that there is no data, while limited is more accurate to highlight that there is data, but it is not always optimal in terms of the spatial distribution, especially of weather stations over South Africa. See line 64. As for the objective of the paper, this has been added and properly stated at the end of the introduction. See line 75-80.

Section 1.2.

When you say in a simplified manner that decision-makers and others can understand and utilize, has a study been conducted by the ARC to seek how easily the climate information provided are easily understood by its end-users? I ask because climate scientists may like to think that the information they provide is easily understood, but it may not necessarily be the case. If there’s a study that has been conducted, kindly reference it.

In the absence of no study to back this up, kindly re-write along the lines of…in a simplified manner that hopefully decision-makers, should be able to easily understand and utilize.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The statement “intended for’ ” and “The utilization of the products shown in the newsletter over several years by various committees within the agricultural sector, the National Disaster Management Centre together with regular inquiries from the general public receiving the newsletter demonstrate the usefulness of the information and also that its presentation provides the information in understandable format” were added in the revised manuscript, see line 83-88

Section 1.3.

I would suggest you include a table that shows the number of weather stations in each province where weather-related information is obtained.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. Mokhele et al. [9] provide the details about the ARC weather station network across South Africa, thus we refer to this paper when noting the weather stations, and how many there are in each province. See line 129.

Section 3.

Kindly separate the results from the discussion. This is necessary to ensure that the findings are robustly discussed. In the discussion, I would like the author(s) to shed light on the uniqueness of the newsletter, which I believe would be of key interest to the global audience.

Response:

Thank you for the valuable comment. The results were separated from the discussion in the revised manuscript, see line 352. The additional details were added in the section considering practical implications. See line 359-366 in the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The improved version of the article was not what was expected, although it describes a little more about the methodology used, there is no quality control for the data used. The authors only integrated the information in a portal, but have no responsibility for the quality of the information. Personally, I consider that the manuscript cannot be considered to be published as a scientific article. It would be advisable to consider another format for the dissemination of your portal.

Authors must ensure some quality control of the data they are offering to users.

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 1

The improved version of the article was not what was expected, although it describes a little more about the methodology used, there is no quality control for the data used. The authors only integrated the information in a portal, but have no responsibility for the quality of the information. Personally, I consider that the manuscript cannot be considered to be published as a scientific article. It would be advisable to consider another format for the dissemination of your portal.

Authors must ensure some quality control of the data they are offering to users.

Thank you for your valuable thoughts. Towards improving the background, we added additional information in the revised manuscript, see lines 41-80. Towards providing more detail regarding quality control, we include some information on how we ensure quality on the information we provide to the readers. See lines, 153-161, 203-204, 221-223, and 226-227. The authors have changed the format of the manuscript to a case report as suggested and we further added additional references, see line 463-493.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you your efforts in improving the paper.

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 2

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your efforts in improving the paper.

Response

Thank you for the positive feedback and valuable suggestions. We are pleased to hear that we were able to reshape the paper in a manner that met your expectations.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for considering the suggestions.

Author Response

Reviewer comments and our replies – Reviewer 3

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for considering the suggestions.

Response:

Thank you for the positive feedback, your suggestions greatly assisted in improving the quality of our paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf