Aligning Resilience and Wellbeing Outcomes for Locally-Led Adaptation in Tanzania
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Firstly, i would like to thanks Sustainability which gave me the opportunity to review such an interesting paper. The world faces a triple and interconnected crisis: a climate emergency, rapid biodiversity destruction and entrenched poverty. The next years will be crucial to prepare, adapt and transform our societies, economies and ecosystems. To date, adaptation, development and humanitarian support to the most vulnerable countries and communities has fallen well short of what is needed. This entitled paper "Aligning resilience and wellbeing outcomes for locally-led adaptation in Tanzania" aims to interplay between local predictors of resilience and wellbeing to assess the validity of self-assessed indicators as part of frameworks to measure resilience. Below is my feedack: 1. Introduction should be enhanced with more references (lines 76-85). 2. How well being and resilience linked with adaptation? Authores should meke it more clear. (Introduction 1.1.) 3. Discussion is sufficient, but it should be developed more ideas for future research on the topic 4. I believe that conclusions is an essential part but is missing from the paper.Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The articles interesting and could make an important contribution to the field if the manuscript was drafted with the view of an international research audience. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and changes are needed before publication; the two key words are exactly "international" and "research", corresponding to the two shortcomings of the manuscript: the lack of an international vision, an absolute requirement since this is not a report submitted to the Tanzanian authorities, but an article submitted to an international research journal, and the lack of research depth, seen through the focus on what was done instead of on why was it done, and how do the results contribute to the advancement of the field.
1. "International": the international view can be improved by making the research available to an international audience. In order to achieve it, Figure 1 should be presented in an international context, showing the position of the case study in an international context, using the "map-in-map" system. Similarly, the discussions should perform an external validation of the results, comparing them with those of similar studies carried out elsewhere, preferably on other continents.
2. The research depth can be increased by (a) adding a critical view to the introduction by inserting, before the final paragraph, another one summarizing the shortcomings of the previous research (misconceptions, ambiguities, lacks etc.), and stressing out the novel and original elements of the previous studies, and (b) developing the discussions to include (i) an internal validation of the results (against the goals declared in the introduction) and an external one (see above); (ii) a presentation of the contribution of the results to the theoretical (conceptual or methodological) advancement of the field; and (c) a summary of the limitations of the study and of the future research directions (including the way of overcoming them).
Apart from this, the authors should be more considerate to the Author Guidelines (see the commas between the last and first names in the author list, the use of full names in the author contributions and the use of a different reference style.
Author Response
Please see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
I really thank you for giving me the possibility to review the paper named " Aligning resilience and wellbeing outcomes for locally-led adaptation in Tanzania" . The paper is well structured. However I suggest to improve the paper in the first part with some definitions more rigorous about Resilience. At this regard, I suggest to look at this paper 10.15866/irece.v11i3.19025 . The field is different but the mathematical approach is very correct.
For the rest I find it very interesting
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I agree with all the revisions that authors made
