Risk Analysis of Regions with Suspicious Illegal Logging and Their Trade Flows
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper entitled "Risk Analysis of Countries with Suspicious Illegal Logging and Their Trade Flows.”, conducted risk assessment on wood sourcing in countries with illegal logging activities, in order to establish better risk indicators to rank the suspicious countries and their trade flow. The entropy weight method was applied to integrate the Human Development Indicator (HDI), the Worldwide Governance Indicator (WGI) and the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The paper is well structured and provides useful information for the readers of the journal. The paper can be published with minor revisions.
- Abstract is written well.
- The results section has been written in a consistent manner and it looks convincing.
- The references cited are mostly decade old. I would advise to cite the latest papers in every context to show the relevance of the problem in the present time. For the readers of the Sustainability journal I recommend to cite at least one recent paper related to illegal logging or deforestation.
Author Response
Responses to the comments of Reviewer #1:
Thank you very much for the helpful and constructive comments, which have assisted us in revising our manuscript. We hope that you find the manuscript sufficiently improved.
Comments and Suggestions
The paper entitled "Risk Analysis of Countries with Suspicious Illegal Logging and Their Trade Flows.”, conducted risk assessment on wood sourcing in countries with illegal logging activities, in order to establish better risk indicators to rank the suspicious countries and their trade flow. The entropy weight method was applied to integrate the Human Development Indicator (HDI), the Worldwide Governance Indicator (WGI) and the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The paper is well structured and provides useful information for the readers of the journal. The paper can be published with minor revisions.
- Abstract is written well.
- The results section has been written in a consistent manner and it looks convincing.
- The references cited are mostly decade old. I would advise to cite the latest papers in every context to show the relevance of the problem in the present time. For the readers of the Sustainability journal I recommend to cite at least one recent paper related to illegal logging or deforestation.
Response
Thanks for your thoughtful advices. We had revised the manuscript and added the related previous works. Please see the attached manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Although the work brings interesting results, I do not consider any new or surprising findings. We already know about most regions or countries from several previous works about their risk in terms of illegal wood harvesting as well as the causes. In some cases, this would require a deeper socio-economic analysis. However, it is an interesting contribution that may be of interest to a wider readership. You can find my more detailed comments and suggestions for editing in the notes in the attached file. Also, the discussion is completely missing here. Please compare your results with relevant work in this area.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Responses to the comments of Reviewer #2:
Thank you very much for the helpful and constructive comments, which have assisted us in revising our manuscript. We hope that you find the manuscript sufficiently improved.
Comments and Suggestions
Although the work brings interesting results, I do not consider any new or surprising findings. We already know about most regions or countries from several previous works about their risk in terms of illegal wood harvesting as well as the causes. In some cases, this would require a deeper socio-economic analysis. However, it is an interesting contribution that may be of interest to a wider readership. You can find my more detailed comments and suggestions for editing in the notes in the attached file. Also, the discussion is completely missing here. Please compare your results with relevant work in this area.
Response
Thanks for your thoughtful advices. We had revised them according to detailed comments and suggestions, including adding the unit labels, literatures updates, and results and discussions. Please see the revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Good improved
