Water Interpretation Centers: A Case Study in Spanish Territory

R.1

Commentary

Suggestions

1

This manuscript was written and submitted as an article. However, based on the content of style, it can be categorized as a report regarding the water centers in Spain.

"Ok, thank very much, your comments have substantially improved the manuscript"

2

“Water museums” was used in the title of the manuscript, but according to the data collected and analyzed, this term was not so popular in Spain. Water interpretation center is perhaps more appropriate.

The tittle has been changed following the reviewer's suggestions: Water Interpretation Centers: a case study in Spanish territory.

3

Some citations and references can be found in the first several sections in “Introduction” for defining and discussing heritage, heritage center, museum, and related social change issues. The last reference that can be found was Cohen and Manion (1990), in Spanish, for investigating methods. Starting from line 179, there were no more citations and references. In addition, those discussion in the “introduction” section did not have close relationships with the content afterward.

"Ok, thank very much, your comments have substantially improved the manuscript"

4

The analysis based on the data collected, whose representativeness was also questionable, were mostly descriptive, without any further statistical treatments.

Graphics, maps, tables and schemes have been introduced to improve the information described

5

The research questions proposed on line 164 cannot be answered with enough support.

New section called “Conclution”

6

Table 1 contains information in Spanish. I suggest at least those labels should be presented in English.

Changed and improved

R.2

Commentary

Suggestions

This is a well written and detailed manuscript, and the authors have taken great care to properly define all their terms. This is refreshing practice for an international readership. The context for the research is well described and the questions posed are well answered and discussed with levels of practical detail that are informative of sustainability education in practice. This is the strength of descriptive evaluation. This novel research systematically investigates the complexities of the education functions of institutions - both the discussion of heritage centers and museums in general and the registered centers in particular were informative. The history, levels of visitation, types of educational activities, the focus topics of education activity, funding variables and staffing considerations of Iberian water education centers are well covered. There is a place in the international literature for evaluative research into the sustainability of sustainability education centres concerning that most vital of substances on a dry peninsular. The research story is well told, and I have no hesitation in recommending this manuscript to the editors. To put it simply, I enjoyed reading this manuscript and was informed by this research

"Ok, thank very much, your comments have substantially improved the manuscript"

R.3

Commentary

Suggestions

1

Check the punctuation in the text.

The entire punctuation has been revised thus improving the text

2

Paragraph 3 "Results": there is a repetition of a sentence.

Done: The identified Centers correspond to Interpretation Centers; Public Use Equipments, such as a Visitor Center; and Environmental Education Equipments, such as Aulas de Río, among others. The most representative figure has been the Water Interpretation Center (52), Visitor Center (17), Water Museum (12), Water House (10), River Museum (5), Sea Museum (5) , Ecomuseum (4), and under the concept of others other figures would be included such as: Museum of Environmental Education, Information Centers, Mills, Museum of Natural Sciences, among others (14).