Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

See attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1.

My name is Hiroto Tanouchi.

First of all we wish to sincerely thank the reviewers for carefully reading the manuscript and for providing many good suggestions for how to improve it. We have implemented the suggested modifications with few exceptions, below follows detailed response to each comment.

Yours sincerely

Hiroto Tanouchi

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Generally, this manuscript was clearly written. However, I have the following concerns. First, the Introduction part is too short at this stage and must be improved through citing more relevant papers. Second, the Results and Discussion part should include more physical interpretations. Third, the limitations of this study should be clearly pointed out. Fourth, there are a few grammatical or editing errors, e.g., the caption of Fig. 5 should be reformatted.

Author Response

Dear reviewer 2.

My name is Hiroto Tanouchi.

First of all we wish to sincerely thank the reviewers for carefully reading the manuscript and for providing many good suggestions for how to improve it. We have implemented the suggested modifications with few exceptions, below follows detailed response to each comment.

Yours sincerely.

Hiroto Tanouchi.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Line 109: correct reference.

Fig 2: EEA webpage: add in References section instead in caption.

Line 299: delete "then" in accurately than then the CORINE model.

References section; several references do not follow the standards of the journal.

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript now makes more sense and is much more coherent than before.