Optimal Allocation of Water Reservoirs for Sustainable Wildfire Prevention Planning via AHP-TOPSIS and Forest Road Network Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Greetings, The paper is well done, but it is necessary to make certain corrections. First of all, it is necessary to write in the abstract what the contribution of this research is. In the introduction, write what the contribution of this paper is and what gaps this research solves. When you did the TOPSIS method, you put too many tables in the text itself. Transfer some to the Annex. In the discussion, include certain references with which you will compare the results of this research. In the conclusion, state the limits of this research.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our manuscript. We appreciate the thorough examination and insightful comments provided on our research. The constructive critiques have greatly contributed to the refinement of our work, and we are grateful for the opportunity to address each point in detail. 

Please find the detailed responses in the attached PDF file and the corresponding revisions/corrections in revised version of our manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article effectively presents its content in a clear and understandable manner. The introduction, materials and methods, and results sections are acceptable, but the discussion is insufficient. There is no reference to other works. The content of the "discussion" section is rather a summary of the work.

Suggestions and comments:

Generally, assessments of location variants were obtained using ArcGIS software (mainly Network Analysis package). The TOPSIS method was used to select the location, and the weights of the criteria were determined using the AHP method. The process of determining the assessment of location options has been clearly presented. However, it is not clear how to define the preferences between the considered criteria in a pairwise comparison. From the point of view of a sustainable approach, a solution based on the minimax concept would be interesting. Alternatively, it would be beneficial to compare the obtained solution with a solution based on the minimax concept.

While reading the work, a question arises about other methods of determining the weights of criteria. The work does not refer to other methods, and the use of the AHP method should be understood as an assumption in the considered location problem.

Giving weights to criteria in location issues often takes into account the variability of assessments in relation to the analyzed criteria. The method of normalizing the assessment of location variants in relation to these criteria is also important.

The discussion may refer to other methods of determining the weights of criteria and indicate the advantages of the AHP method that determine its selection in this case.

 

The description preceding Figure 4 suggests that there are 100 potential locations marked, which is not the case.

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our manuscript. We appreciate the thorough examination and insightful comments provided on our research. The constructive critiques have greatly contributed to the refinement of our work, and we are grateful for the opportunity to address each point in detail. 

Please find the detailed responses in the attached PDF file and the corresponding revisions/corrections in revised version of our manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article entitled as “Optimal allocation of water reservoirs for sustainable wildfire prevention planning via AHP-TOPSIS and forest road network analysis” highlights the importance of increasing occurrence of forest wildfires and its prompted need for the establishment of infrastructures aimed at addressing them. This study introduces a Decision Support System (DSS) tailored for the optimal allocation of antifire water reservoirs in Mediterranean forest ecosystems, ensuring a reliable water supply for firefighting operations.

 

The methodology integrates Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique of Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solutions (TOPSIS) methods, facilitating precise location determination through comprehensive criteria analysis. Additionally, the analysis of the forest road network is incorporated to optimize the placement of water reservoirs.

The study is quite interesting and the study's findings demonstrated that by establishing 34 water reservoirs, firefighting forces can access a replenishment point within a 5-minute travel time. The conclusions underscore the efficacy of this methodology as a valuable decision-making tool for sustainable wildfire prevention planning. This approach empowers authorities to allocate resources judiciously, effectively mitigating the wildfire risk in Mediterranean forest ecosystems.

The present research is quite interesting and can be considered for its publication after minor revisions.

Below are my concerns:

Abstract can be further revised to explain the methodology of the present research.

Methodology section can be elaborated in more detail.

Discussion section is very small. It should be elaborated more clearly.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our manuscript. We appreciate the thorough examination and insightful comments provided on our research. The constructive critiques have greatly contributed to the refinement of our work, and we are grateful for the opportunity to address each point in detail. 

Please find the detailed responses in the attached PDF file and the corresponding revisions/corrections in revised version of our manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf