Integrating Agriculture and Ecosystems to Find Suitable Adaptations to Climate Change

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article bearing the title"ntegrating Agriculture and Ecosystems to Find Suitable Adaptations to Climate Change" is very usefull for the readers. I am recommend this article with major revision with following improvement:

i suggest to summarize the past studies in Table form with climate impacts and indicator at the end of section 2, so, the readers of the journal can easily understand.

Figure 1 is required to improve with addition of Past studies.

Table 1 need to be correct, some rows are empty and need to draw clear, delete unnecessary rows

The over all review article  have deficiency of quantitiave description, it will improve the readers.

There is need to flow chart from climate change to its adoption startegies.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1:

The article bearing the title"ntegrating Agriculture and Ecosystems to Find Suitable Adaptations to Climate Change" is very usefull for the readers. I am recommend this article with major revision with following improvement:

i suggest to summarize the past studies in Table form with climate impacts and indicator at the end of section 2, so, the readers of the journal can easily understand.

Thank you for your thoughtful review of our manuscript. As suggested, we have included Table 1 as a summary of climate change impacts to agriculture and ecosystems. This should aid the reader’s comprehension of the literature review.

Figure 1 is required to improve with addition of Past studies.

In order to maintain the readability of Figure 1, we have refrained from adding particular studies to the figure itself. However, in response to your comment, we have added particular studies to the description in the preceding paragraph. Hopefully, this will provide the reader with context and citable information to how to approach analyzing the impact of agriculture and markets to ecosystem services as they consider their research framework.

Table 1 need to be correct, some rows are empty and need to draw clear, delete unnecessary rows

Upon our review we cannot find empty or unnecessary rows. However, we have changed the positioning of text in Table 2 (formally Table 1) to remove unnecessary white space.

The over all review article  have deficiency of quantitiave description, it will improve the readers.

This article is a review manuscript and not a research manuscript. We have followed the guidelines and section headers recommended by Climate. While quantitative descriptions might be inappropriate, we have aimed to make the manuscript clearer by adding language that clearly identifies the research question, findings, and suggested future research directions.  

There is need to flow chart from climate change to its adoption startegies.

In order to make clear how physical climate changes lead to adaptations, we have included a flow chart (Figure 2). This also now includes an example from the literature.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a remarkable article dealing with a set of issues that have been rarely mentioned in the literature. There is an extensive literature review based on a profound understanding of the literature.

This is likely to be an article that is read by a huge audience and has the potential to contribute constructively to future research in this domaine.

The article is practically ready for pûblication. There are just 3 or 4 very minor corrections to be made, but they can be undertaken by the Editorial Staff member who prepares the article for publication.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2:

Thank you for your thoughtful review of our manuscript. We hope that the subject matter will be of interest to a broad audience. We have completed another round of revisions that we hope address the minor corrections you identified.

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is in general well written, but my major concern is if this paper is appropriate for this journal: in the present form, it is not a climatological study, but it is more dealing with agriculture or with agriculture economy. 

Under these circumstances, I consider that the paper titled "Integrating Agriculture and Ecosystems to Find Suitable Adaptations to Climate Change" is not appropriate for this journal and I recommend submission to another journal.

 

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3:

Thank you for your thoughtful review of our manuscript. However, we disagree and believe that this article is appropriate for the journal. Under Climate’s “Aim and Scope” section they encourage submissions of interdisciplinary climate research, such as ours. Specifically, they indicate that the impact of climate to: ecosystems, food production, and society are of interest. Further, they also identify climate mitigation and adaptation as a focus for papers. With this in mind, we believe that Climate is a suitable journal for our manuscript.

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper deals with issues of adaptations to Climate Change. The paper is novel, presents interesting concepts however technically it needs revision. Abstract is not concise. 

 It needs to be revised by highlighting the purpose, approach, findings, practical implications. The originality and input of paper as well are necessary in abstract.

The introduction needs to be revised with much better motivation and providing the context for this work. Relevance of the Theme, Research Questions, Objectives should be clearly addressed in introduction. Input of paper also should be stressed in introduction;The structure of the paper should be given in the end of introduction

The literature review is quite strong just the main research trends should be more highlighted in review;

Discussion section is missing.

Conclusions should provide clear policy implications  as well as future research guidelines as all studies have some limitations and can be extended and enhanced

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4:

The paper deals with issues of adaptations to Climate Change. The paper is novel, presents interesting concepts however technically it needs revision. Abstract is not concise. 

 It needs to be revised by highlighting the purpose, approach, findings, practical implications. The originality and input of paper as well are necessary in abstract.

Thank you for your thoughtful review of our manuscript.

The abstract has been revised with more specific language to aid the reader in identifying the purpose, approach, findings, and practical implications.

The introduction needs to be revised with much better motivation and providing the context for this work. Relevance of the Theme, Research Questions, Objectives should be clearly addressed in introduction. Input of paper also should be stressed in introduction;The structure of the paper should be given in the end of introduction

Per your suggestions, the introduction has been reorganized such that the outline of the paper is given at the end. Further, we have added phrases that clearly indicate the objectives, research questions, and structure.

The literature review is quite strong just the main research trends should be more highlighted in review;

In order to provide more structure and distill the major points of the literature review, we have added Table 1.

Discussion section is missing.

Following the outline proposed by Climate for review manuscripts, we have purposely excluded a specific discussion section. However, based on your comment, we have clarified the language and paragraph structure of Section 4.

Conclusions should provide clear policy implications  as well as future research guidelines as all studies have some limitations and can be extended and enhanced

Conclusions have been updated to suggest future research direction and policies to support findings.

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors have improved manuscript and have addressed my all comments. The manuscript can be printed in current form.