An Improved Understanding of Natural Hazards and Disasters through the Use of Satellite Technologies: Contributions from UN-SPIDER
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I am happy to read this article regarding” An improved understanding of natural hazards and disasters through the use of satellite technologies: contributions from UN-SPIDER”. This research study has shown the significance contributions in the field of space borne technology to address current disasters issues especillly in the developing world. Also, UN-SPIDER contributions made it possible for developing countries to formulate their management plans for disasters. I have strongly recommended for the publicstion in this journal.
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer,
I am very grateful for reading this contribution.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Villagran de Leon,
Author
Reviewer 2 Report
The article has an interesting title and purpose. An improved understanding of natural hazards and disasters through the use of satellite technologies: contributions from UN-SPIDER. The author choose an interesting practical approach, especially the contribution from UN-SPIDER. Basically, it's the right choice for readers of Sustainability. Nevertheless, the article is not sufficiently in-depth for a literature study, which for a practical approach is not a big problem. It requires some expansion. The main comments:
1. Expand the overview.
2. The author should refer to the previous research results in this area.
3. The discussion should specify the author's contribution to the previous considerations.
Recommended reading:
Titko, M. and Ristvej, J. (2020): Assessing Importance of Disaster Preparedness Factors for Sustainable Disaster Risk Management: The Case of the Slovak Republic, In Journal: Sustainability, Vol. 12, Iss. 21, 2020, Article Number: 9121, DOI: 10.3390/su12219121. / https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9121
Titko, M., Ristvej, J., Zamiar, Z. (2021) Population Preparedness for Disasters and Extreme Weather Events as a Predictor of Building a Resilient Society: The Slovak Republic, In: Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, no. 5: 2311. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052311 / https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2311
()
N/A.
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer,
Thank you for reviewing the manuscript that I submitted for publication. Please see my comments to your suggestions:
I fully agree with you that the contribution is not sufficiently in depth to be a literature review. It only presents the work done by UN-SPIDER to increase the skills of government staff and the capacity of national disaster management agencies and other government institutions in developing countries to use space technologies in applications related to disaster management. This stems from the fact that UN-SPIDER is not a scientific institution, but a programme established to provide technical advisory support. UN-SPIDER relies on the scientific advice of the experts from its Regional Support Offices and on the knowledge developed by other organizations and agencies of the United Nations when developing procedures and providing that advisory support to government agencies. To this end, I am proposing to elevate this manuscript as a "Contribution" and not as a scientific or technical article.
Furthermore, as you suggested, I have expanded the overview in several ways, and tried to make it more logical. I have added content on the international frameworks established by the United Nations to steer disaster risk reduction, response, and recovery efforts. I made explicit mention to the use of space technologies in these frameworks established by the United Nations in the last two decades. I have also introduced the notion of the disaster management cycle more explicitly to illustrate how UN-SPIDER is adapting its efforts to this cycle developed by the disaster management community. You can find the new text in the updated version, in MS Word using track changes, in lines 38 to 65; 79 to 112; and 148 to 175.
Finally, thanks for the suggestion to review the two articles.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Villagran de Leon
Author
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
“An improved understanding of natural hazards and disasters through the use of satellite technologies: contributions from UN-SPIDER –the main observations of this article are as follows:
· Author mainly discusses the UN-SPIDER activities in Disaster Management Issue
· No specific data and methods are used to analyse. Only conceptualise things are discussed.
· This Paper demonstrates only the activities of UN-SPIDER. This is not actually a research article, rather statement-based information on disaster management highlighting UN-SPIDER's contribution.
· In the material and method section only descriptions are there, no specific data and methods are included for analysing. Some institutional activities are mentioned.
· There is no synchronization among the objectives, data used, methodology and findings.
· Even, in reference only organization reports, programmes and web portals are included. No single author-related research paper is there in the reference.
· This looks like a book chapter. I suggest this can be a book chapter for information, data availability, methods and activities of UN-SPIDER.
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer;
Thank you for reviewing the manuscript that I submitted for publication. Please see my comments to your suggestions:
I agree with you that the contribution lacks the scientific style of research articles. It only presents the work done by UN-SPIDER to increase the skills of government staff and the capacity of national disaster management agencies and other government institutions in developing countries to use space technologies in applications related to disaster management. I have tried to present this limited aim in the abstract and in the introduction.
This limitation stems from the fact that UN-SPIDER is not a scientific institution, but a programme established to provide technical advisory support with a focus on developing countries. UN-SPIDER relies on the scientific advice of the experts from its Regional Support Offices and on the knowledge developed by other organizations and agencies of the United Nations when developing procedures and providing that advisory support to government agencies.
Nevertheless, I have expanded the overview in several ways, and tried to make it more logical. I have added additional references in several sections to try to address your comment.
I agree with you that the manuscript is not elaborated in a typical format of an article to report on the results of scientific research. I hope that submitting it as a “Contribution”, as opposed to an article, is better.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Villagran de Leon
Author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper is very well-structured. A minor suggestion to include some more references to Copernicus Emergency Management Services (i.e. EDO, EFFIS, EFAS). More details at: https://emergency.copernicus.eu/
The additions would provide with a more comprehensive overview of existing space-based systems for early warning and monitoring, among others.
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer;
Thank you for reviewing the manuscript that I submitted for publication. Please see my comments to your suggestion to add additional information on the Copernicus Emergency Management Services:
In the updated version presented in MS Word with track changes, you will find an initial mention to the Copernicus Emergency Management Services in lines 130 to 136.
Regarding the Global Drought Observatory, you will find additional content in lines 362 to 368.
In the case of the Global Wildfire Information System, I have added explicit texts in lines 524 to 534.
I hope that the proposed content meets your suggestions.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Villagran de Leon
Author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Dear author,
Thank you for your article entitled “An improved understanding of natural hazards and disasters through the use of satellite technologies: contributions from UN-SPIDER”. It offers interesting clues about the use of space-based data in the management of risk related to natural disasters occurrence.
Unfortunately, there are some issues affecting the work and we can’t suggest it for publication in the present form.
Firstly, according to the present version, the paper looks like a Communication rather than an Article. Even if it shows significant preliminary findings, being part of a larger study over multiple years, it does not directly report scientific experiments and data about the application of innovative approaches in the disaster management cycle. The paper totally refers to the step-by-step procedures developed by UN-SPIDER, called Recommended Practices, together with general considerations and observations.
Moreover, according to the reported references, it will be useful to revise the general structure and layout by reporting information about: Storm Surge Coastal Flood Modelling (reference n.° 9); Drought monitoring (reference n.° 10 and 11); Exposure Mapping (reference n.° 14); Flood Mapping (reference n.° 17 and 18); Burn severity mapping (reference n.° 19).
To improve its readability and its scientific soundness, I would suggest the Author to add clear references to the most representative case studies and test sites (i.e., Pakistan, Chile, Central America, Mozambique, Malawi, etc.).
It will be useful for readers to see in the manuscript produced thematic maps and results of some case studies to better understand the experience of UN-SPIDER, taking valuable insights for future applications of such approaches in other regions and/or countries.
Best regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Concerning English language, only minor revisions are required. Please refer to the attached .pdf file
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer;
Thank you for reviewing the manuscript that I submitted for publication. Please see my comments to your suggestions:
I fully agree with you that the manuscript lacks the scientific style of research articles. It only presents the work done by UN-SPIDER to increase the skills of government staff and the capacity of national disaster management agencies and other government institutions in developing countries to use space technologies in applications related to disaster management. Therefore, I agree with your suggestion to submit it as a “Contribution” instead of a scientific article.
This limitation stems from the fact that UN-SPIDER is not a scientific institution, but a programme established to provide technical advisory support with a focus on developing countries. UN-SPIDER relies on the scientific advice of the experts from its Regional Support Offices and on the knowledge developed by other organizations and agencies of the United Nations when developing procedures and providing that advisory support to government agencies.
Regarding your suggestion to revise the general structure and layout; allow me to comment that I have expanded the introductory segment with content on the international frameworks established by the United Nations to steer disaster risk reduction, response, and recovery efforts. You can find this content in the updated manuscript I am submitting in MS Word using track changes in lines 38 to 65.
I made explicit mention to the use of space technologies in these frameworks established by the United Nations in the last two decades. You can find this new content in lines 79 to112.
I have also introduced the notions of disaster risk management and the disaster management cycle more explicitly to illustrate how UN-SPIDER is adapting its efforts to these frameworks developed by the disaster management community. You can find this new content in lines 156 to 175.
In response to your suggestions to improve the information on the hazards presents in the recommended practices (storm surges, flood hazard modelling, drought monitoring, exposure mapping, flood mapping and burn severity mapping), I have added additional text describing the procedures as defined by experts in such topics, and links to articles.
- In the case of flood hazard mapping, you will find this new content in lines 281 to 288.
- In the case of storm surge hazard mapping, you will find this new content in lines 309 to 317.
- In the case of drought early warning, you will find this new content in lines 334 to 368.
- In the case of flood hazard mapping, you can find additional text in lines 469 to 477.
- In the case of burn severity due to forest fires, you can find additional text in lines 504 to510.
Allow me to comment that I have also addressed your suggestions to add clear references to the case studies and test sites.
- In the case of flood hazard mapping, you can find more information on the Pakistan test site in lines 297 to 302.
- In the case of storm surge hazard mapping, you can find additional information on the Ghana test site in lines 323 to 327.
- In the case of drought early warning, you can find addition information on the test site in Guatemala in lines 384 to 388 and the test site in Paraguay in lines 400 to 408.
- In the case of disaster preparedness, you can find additional content on the case study in lines 450 to 453.
- In the case of flood mapping, you can find additional content on the case study in Malawi on line 490 to 494.
- In the case of burn severity, you can fin additional content in lines 513 to 517.
Finally, allow me to also comment that I have added the thematic maps for all examples.
- In the case of flood hazard mapping, please see figure 2.
- In the case of storm surge hazard mapping, please see figure 3.
- In the case of drought early warning, please see figure 4.
- In the case of disaster preparedness, you can find additional content on the case study in lines 450 to 453.
- In the case of flood mapping, please see figure 5.
- In the case of burn severity, please see figure 6.
Finally, thanks for checking the text of the manuscript. I have incorporated all your suggestions.
I hope that I have addressed your suggestions properly.
Sincerely,
Juan Carlos Villagran de Leon
Author
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The author has improved the matters in the manuscript sufficiently. However, I have two more minor corrections.
1. Keywords: Please select 4-5 keywords.
2. Author can merge 'result' and 'discussion' together as 'result and Discussion'
Author Response
Esteemed Reviewer,
Thank you for your additional comments and suggestions. As per your suggestions, I have eliminated some key words and left five. Please see lines 20 to 22 of the new version of the manuscript.
In addition, I merged the sections entitled "results" and "discussion" into a single section.
