Comparing the Effects of Erosion and Accretion along the Eastern Coast of Río de Janeiro and Guanabara Bay in Brazil

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

minor editing

Author Response

1. Summary

Thank you in advance for your time in reviewing our manuscript. The responses and/or corresponding modifications will be listed one by one below (in red) to track changes in the manuscript.

2. Questions for General

Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Must be improved	The content of the article has been revised in accordance with the theoretical background, and changes have been made to enhance its quality.
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Must be improved	The research question is concerned with the coastal city as an artistic, cultural, and historical heritage. It examines the evolution of the coastal landscape from its natural state, through the built environment, to the modified landscape, whether destroyed or reconstructed. The objective is to ascertain whether the transformation of the landscape in cities that shared a similar historical colonization epoch was influenced by the conquerors who arrived on their shores. It can therefore be postulated that the landscape consequences of this influence vary depending on the empire that arrived in each city. The development of the research question was answered through the use of case studies, which were conducted on a case-by-case basis. The general study area was limited to the American continent, and the period evaluated was limited to the 16th to 21st centuries. The first case study was conducted on Cartagena de Indias (Colombia), under the Spanish empire. This research was published in the Journal of Coastal Research in 2021 (reference 2). The second case study is this article about Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) under the Portuguese empire. The third case study corresponds to New Orleans (USA), where both Spanish and French colonization was experienced. Finally, the conclusion of the general investigation will culminate with the comparison of the results obtained from the different case studies.
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Can be improved	The arguments and discussion section of the results obtained have been reorganized in order to present them in a more coherent, balanced, and convincing manner.
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Can be improved	The results section has been reorganized to provide a comprehensive overview.
Is the article adequately referenced?	Yes
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Can be improved	The conclusions have been revised to align more closely with the findings presented in the article.

  

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: I suggest organizing the entire abstract in a more sequential manner, immediately introducing the general problem and why it is important to identify types of groundwater. It would be important to highlight what is innovative about the study, what it adds to the state of the art; otherwise, it remains open to the reader's interpretation.

Response 1: The abstract has been revised and rewritten to provide a more detailed account of the study conducted and the results obtained, while also highlighting the contribution to the state of the art on the subject. Please find the updated manuscript attached in the .zip file.

Comments 2: There are too few references in the introduction, with none appearing in the first 30-39 lines.

Response 2: The text now includes new references.

Comments 3: I could not see the gap you fill in this research! Did you apply new technique or new software to judge the contribution? as I see only applying ArcGIS. Please explain

Response 3: The study did not employ any novel software. The methodology describes the use of QGis and AutoCAD. The value of this research lies in its detailed analysis of the change of the coastline as a quantitative method of visualizing the change in the coastal landscape caused by the passage of human beings along the coasts. The aim is to raise awareness among readers and researchers who have access to the article, oriented towards sustainability and the reconstruction of the coastal landscape. In addition, this case study is part of a larger investigation that will culminate in a comparison of the results obtained to demonstrate, or not, the direct influence of human activity on the destruction of landscapes and ecosystems.

Comments 4: The structure of the introduction is not acceptable. please rewrite considering the right structure. Also, I cannot see the previous research at this study area.

Response 4: The introductory section has been reorganized in order to enhance comprehension and facilitate the reader's understanding of the material. The preceding investigations were presented in the section titled "Study Area." A brief historical overview of the area was then provided. The preceding studies were integrated into the section titled "Evolution of the Littoral Landscape of the Study Area." Finally, the results were compared with those of previous studies in the discussion section.

Comments 5: In the “study area” section: you have to mention the coordinates of the study area. Also, the resolution of Figure 1 is very low. please enhance.

Response 5: The coordinates of the study area were included in the manuscript. With regard to the resolution of figures, please direct your attention to response number 7.

Comments 6: The section of “study area” is too long. Please summarize adding the important points only.

Response 6: The Study Area section has been reorganized in order to provide a more concise overview.

Comments 7: The resolution of all figures is very low, please enhance.

Response 7: A high-quality resolution of all figures is provided in the separate attachment. In the main body of the paper, the figures are presented as a preceding element to facilitate the reader's comprehension. Please find the figures with the real resolution attached in the .zip file.

Comments 8: The paper does not extensively discuss the socio-economic impacts of the coastal landscape transformations, which could provide a more holistic understanding of the changes.

Response 8: The article presents a historical analysis of the evolution of the coastal landscape in response to anthropogenic influences. However, the socioeconomic impact was not considered in this case. Nevertheless, we concur and acknowledge that this type of analysis could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research, and thus has been included in future case studies.

Comments 9: The research does not delve deeply into the long-term environmental consequences of the observed erosion and accretion processes, leaving room for further investigation.

Response 9: The research is oriented towards the historical study of the transformation of the coastal landscape. It is our contention that a clear understanding of the manner in which our decisions as a species have generated changes in the coastline will open the horizon for new generations of technicians and researchers to develop more sustainable and environmentally friendly projects.

Comments 10: In general, the manuscript is too long as it is a long report not a manuscript. Structure of the should be reconsidered.

Response 10: A general revision of the manuscript has been carried out with the objective of reducing its length to align more closely with the format of a scientific article and to facilitate the comprehension of researchers.

 

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1: Minor editing of English language required.

Response 1: English language editing will be done to improve it.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is well-written and structured.

However, the method applied is very simple, and the results/comparisons are informative. I advise the authors to check the abstract again; I believe it doesn't clearly reflect the contents.

A limitation of the study should be presented, such as the fact that it doesn't include the impact of SLR on erosion rate estimations. Climate change, in terms of SLR, could contribute to the erosion increase, etc. 

Also, further discussion should be directed to stakeholders or decision makers supported via future sight if no protection measures are applied (i.e., the conclusion section should provide a clear recommendation based upon the erosion-accretion trend).

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer X Comments 1.       Summary Thank you in advance for your time in reviewing our manuscript. The responses and/or corresponding modifications will be listed one by one below (in red) to track changes in the manuscript. 2.       Questions for General
Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Can be improved	The content of the article has been revised in accordance with the theoretical background, and changes have been made to enhance its quality.
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Can be improved	The research question is concerned with the coastal city as an artistic, cultural, and historical heritage. It examines the evolution of the coastal landscape from its natural state, through the built environment, to the modified landscape, whether destroyed or reconstructed. The objective is to ascertain whether the transformation of the landscape in cities that shared a similar historical colonization epoch was influenced by the conquerors who arrived on their shores. It can therefore be postulated that the landscape consequences of this influence vary depending on the empire that arrived in each city. The development of the research question was answered through the use of case studies, which were conducted on a case-by-case basis. The general study area was limited to the American continent, and the period evaluated was limited to the 16th to 21st centuries. The first case study was conducted on Cartagena de Indias (Colombia), under the Spanish empire. This research was published in the Journal of Coastal Research in 2021 (reference 2). The second case study is this article about Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) under the Portuguese empire. The third case study corresponds to New Orleans (USA), where both Spanish and French colonization was experienced. Finally, the conclusion of the general investigation will culminate with the comparison of the results obtained from the different case studies.
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Yes
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Yes
Is the article adequately referenced?	Yes
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Can be improved	The conclusions have been revised to align more closely with the findings presented in the article.

 

3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Comments 1: The paper is well-written and structured. However, the method applied is very simple, and the results/comparisons are informative. I advise the authors to check the abstract again; I believe it doesn't clearly reflect the contents.

Response 1: The abstract has been revised and rewritten to provide a more detailed account of the study conducted and the results obtained, while also highlighting the contribution to the state of the art on the subject. Please find the updated manuscript attached in the .zip file.

 

Comments 2: A limitation of the study should be presented, such as the fact that it doesn't include the impact of SLR on erosion rate estimations. Climate change, in terms of SLR, could contribute to the erosion increase, etc.

Response 2: A brief analysis of the impact of sea level rise on the estimation of erosion of some coasts within the study area based on a new reference has been included. It is acknowledged that climate change, in terms of sea level rise (SLR), is one of the most significant factors contributing to the observed increase in erosion.

Comments 3: Also, further discussion should be directed to stakeholders or decision makers supported via future sight if no protection measures are applied (i.e., the conclusion section should provide a clear recommendation based upon the erosion-accretion trend).

Response 3: One of the references in the article corresponds to The Development Process and Methods for the Guanabara Bay Report Card, a document prepared by the Integration and Application Network at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. This reference provides an excellent overview of the platform and materials utilized in the development of an annual report card that acts to synthesize, interpret, and disseminate information about the region, drawing upon data collected by the government through the State Institute of the Environment (INEA). The objective of this document is to utilize the iterative process of creating report cards to enhance community and management awareness and comprehension of the status of the health of Guanabara Bay and its basin. The information obtained from this source enabled us to gain insight into the perspectives of various actors in the region, including the government, the partners of the Environmental Sanitation Program of the Municipalities Around Guanabara Bay (PSAM), and the INEA.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a very interesting paper that reviews coastal erosion and accretion on two cartographic maps one from colonial times and another from 2022 images.  Results demonstrate that the accretion is greater than erosion, and that has been land reclamation in the east coast of Rio de Janeiro and the coastline of Guanabara Bay. I consider that the recount of the history and evolution of the coastal zone in those two places is very interesting but a little long. Please try to make a table with the most important dates and facts.

On the other hand, you mention "the perception of the physical environment to understand and to shape the ecosystem and turn it into territory, to transform it from “site” into “place”. This is a key element within coastal inhabitants/stakeholders for the management of the coastal zone. The evolution of the coastal zone that you presented in different photographs require public involvement. This perception assessment was not presented in methodology nor in results, and is necessary to support the discussion where you stated "the historical development of each zone. This evidence demonstrates the impact of anthropic intervention on the coastline, providing a clear example of the coastline's variability." "This will serve as a foundation for understanding the response of each section to the behavior of the coastal climate." Human interventions are based on public policies that are designed with public participation, their opinions and perceptions. Please add some studies/articles that evaluate stakeholders' perceptions.

Author Response

Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1: This is a very interesting paper that reviews coastal erosion and accretion on two cartographic maps one from colonial times and another from 2022 images.  Results demonstrate that the accretion is greater than erosion, and that has been land reclamation in the east coast of Rio de Janeiro and the coastline of Guanabara Bay. I consider that the recount of the history and evolution of the coastal zone in those two places is very interesting but a little long. Please try to make a table with the most important dates and facts.

Response 1: A table containing the most pertinent data has been incorporated into the document. Please find the updated manuscript attached in the .zip file.

 

Comments 2: On the other hand, you mention "the perception of the physical environment to understand and to shape the ecosystem and turn it into territory, to transform it from “site” into “place”. This is a key element within coastal inhabitants/stakeholders for the management of the coastal zone. The evolution of the coastal zone that you presented in different photographs require public involvement. This perception assessment was not presented in methodology nor in results, and is necessary to support the discussion where you stated "the historical development of each zone. This evidence demonstrates the impact of anthropic intervention on the coastline, providing a clear example of the coastline's variability." "This will serve as a foundation for understanding the response of each section to the behavior of the coastal climate." Human interventions are based on public policies that are designed with public participation, their opinions and perceptions. Please add some studies/articles that evaluate stakeholders' perceptions.

Response 2: One of the references in the article corresponds to The Development Process and Methods for the Guanabara Bay Report Card, a document prepared by the Integration and Application Network at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. This reference provides an excellent overview of the platform and materials utilized in the development of an annual report card that acts to synthesize, interpret, and disseminate information about the region, drawing upon data collected by the government through the State Institute of the Environment (INEA). The objective of this document is to utilize the iterative process of creating report cards to enhance community and management awareness and comprehension of the status of the health of Guanabara Bay and its basin. The information obtained from this source enabled us to gain insight into the perspectives of various actors in the region, including the government, the partners of the Environmental Sanitation Program of the Municipalities Around Guanabara Bay (PSAM), and the INEA.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please replace figure 1, and 7 with the highest resolution one
from supplementary data as I can hardly read the coordinates.

Author Response

Comment: Please replace figure 1, and 7 with the highest resolution one from supplementary data as I can hardly read the coordinates

Response: Figures 1 and 7 have been reprinted with an enhanced resolution of supplementary data, facilitating the interpretation of the coordinates. Please find the updated figures attached in the pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf