Examining the Ability of Communities to Cope with Food Insecurity due to Climate Change

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please find attached comments/ suggestions.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

This contains how we addressed the comments from the two reviewers, the yellow painted are comments from the reviewers and the no color paint are the responses from the research team.

Reviewer #1

Introduction could be better drafted to incorporate and reflect the purpose statement. While
the rationale behind this manuscript echoes throughout the introduction, the problem
statement is not clarified adequately. A line on the goal of this study would also probably help
here.
Lines 10-12 “The high levels of food underutilization are further manifested through the
increase in obesity, variations in stiltedness and children malnutrition, Africa and Asia being
the biggest victims.”

Would be worth revising to ensure appropriate comprehension/ grammar.
Lines 27-29 “This has caused massive change of forests and permanent wetlands into
farmlands, improving food security and causing destruction of the ecosystem services, leading
to climate change [12].

Consider revising this statement as it sounds like a refutation to the overall objective of this
paper.Please consider re-drafting Figure 1 (Theoretical framework for ability to cope with food
insecurity) to make it more understandable. The current format is a bit confusing for the
reader.

• the whole introduction was reviewed following the reviewer’s suggestions and also some of the statements which had some queries were eliminated.

2.2. Survey Administration

Nice to see that an interpreter was employed in administering the questionnaire. Although
theoretically feasible, I’m curious to know the rationale for focusing on ‘Buyende’ and ‘Serere’
districts of Uganda. This needs to better reflect within 2.3. Description of the study area.

Lines 88-89 “The questionnaire included information on respondent’s resources, effect to
climate change and coping mechanisms employed to reduce the impact of climate change on
food security”.

Please review; could revise the highlighted section to ensure adequate grammar and
comprehension. This is a consistent issue across other sections within the manuscript and
could be easily fixed.

Lines 95-98 “Buyende district is geographical located in Busoga sub region, in Eastern Uganda
and covering an area of approximately 726.1 square miles, with a population of approximately
265, 100 in 2012”

The statistics outlined here needs to be revised to reflect current population density. Is there a
specific reason for focusing on data from 2012? This is even more critical because as per line
241 the study focuses on “pattern of food production in the past five years”.

Line 112 “The sample size was determined using [33] formula” Consider revising to ensure further clarity.

• There was no specific reason for taking 2012 UBOS statistics, therefore the authors agreed to adopt a more recent year UBOS statistics.
• Adequate grammar editing of this section was done.
• Also adjusted the section following the reviewer’s suggestions.

3.1. Socio-demographic characteristics

Lines 150-152 “Over 81% of respondents were greater than 26 years and are expected to be
knowledgeable about the food security issues in their communities”.
Now, though theoretically viable, I am interested to understand why respondents below the
age of 18 (or for that matter 18- to 25-year-olds) were included within the study? Would this
not rebut lines 150-152? A justification around the reason for this age cohort being included
within the study would be helpful in clarifying these aspects.Ethical consideration- This is key especially with participants below 18 years. It would help to
get a better understanding on whether ethical issues were considered in administering the
survey/ undertaking data collection.

• the Ethical considerations were followed during the administering of the questionnaire, inclusion of the below the rage below 18 years of age was to make sure that quality data was collected.
• this section was also revised to make it more understandable

Figure 8: Household sources of income for both Serere and Buyende districts, Figure 9.
Variations of seasons in Serere district (a) and Buyende district (b), Figure 10: Time of the
year when food is enough, Figure 11: Pattern of food production in the last five years.
Please re-consider other options to better illustrate the findings so that can be understood
without referring to the remainder of the manuscript. Also, pie charts are poor at
communicating data and this makes it worth considering other relevant alternatives.

• The figures 8-11 were revised to different figure representations.

Discussion section; would encourage the inclusion of ‘discussion section’ as a part of this manuscript. This is where claims around the uniqueness of the study could be stated. Further, a discussion on the findings of the current study in the light of earlier studies and how the findings reported within this manuscript differs from other relevant studies could be beneficial in improving the overall quality of this manuscript. Unfortunately, the conclusion and summary section does
not adequately justify the results of the study. Limitations and Further Research Direction; It would be worth noting the limitations of the study. Implications; A concise paragraph addressing the research implications of the study findings would also be helpful in improving the overall quality of this manuscript.

• A discussion section was added into the paper plus the limitation and future research section.

Reference list; Needs to be revised to ensure consistency.

• the referencing in the whole paper was revised.

Reviewer 2 Report

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1347456

Titled: Examining Community's ability to cope with food insecurity due to changing climate

 

The authors tried to examine the community perception and ability to cope with food insecurity that is triggered by climate change in the different ecological zone of Serere and Buyende of Uganda. This manuscript is not worth reading despite the crowd of co-authors. The objective of the research is missing in the manuscript. I have some comments to make the manuscript publishable in this journal.

1. Inconsistency in the sample sampling process, authors described they had applied snowball sampling in the abstract and proportionate sampling procedures in the description of the study area section?
2. Why they applied proportionate sampling?
3. What is the objective of the research?
4. The theoretical framework is incomplete, showing the cause of Food insecurity only Risk exposure and Ability to deal with risk is not justifiable. Please modify the Theoretical framework.
5. Figure 2 and 3 please add coordinate of the map as well.
6. 2.2 why males have high access to water sources compared to females?
7. What is the implication of the findings of this research?
8. Extensive English editing is required.

Author Response

Reviewer #2

1. Inconsistency in the sample sampling process, authors described they had applied snowball sampling in the abstract and proportionate sampling procedures in the description of the study area section?
2. Why they applied proportionate sampling?

 

• With agreement of the research team and consultation of the members who were in charge of the data collection, the team came to an agreement that it was snowball sampling that was used in our study and thus we described it in our methods.

 

1. What is the objective of the research?
2. The theoretical framework is incomplete, showing the cause of Food insecurity only Risk exposure and Ability to deal with risk is not justifiable. Please modify the Theoretical framework.
3. Figure 2 and 3 please add coordinate of the map as well.

• the maps were not charnged with an argument that we have sub regions say the lake kyoga in the same frame which would not make meaning for us to add coordinates on the outer frame.

 

1. 2.2 why males have high access to water sources compared to females?

• This is attributed to the remoteness of the water sources in the study area that in some families the men go to fetch water because they can handle.

1. What is the implication of the findings of this research?

• A discussion section was added into the paper plus the limitation and future research section.

1. Extensive English editing is required.

• Thorough reading of the paper was done by the different members.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have revised the paper substantially. I propose English editing.