Estimation of Water Resource Ecosystem Service Value inTarim River Basin—From a Full Value Chain Perspective

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

Comments regarding manuscript titled “Estimation of Water Resources Ecological Service System Value in Tarim River Basin -- From a Full Value Chain Perspective”

First of all, the manuscript touches an important issue such as monetary evaluation of ecosystem services. However, there are some points that must be improved.

Please specify the aim of the study. At this moment is not clear enough.

l. 186 What means 250M? Please use SI unite. Add maps of "four sources and one trunk" of the Tarim river basin. – Now, it’s difficult to understand the hydrology of the river.

How long is the river? What is the catchment  area of the river? Have you been researching the entire river, or a part of it?

Add the unite to the tables, as in table 4. It makes them more readable.

Improve the quality of the fig.1.

Add units to equitation (2), (7), ….

Point 4.3.1 What means Scenic spots?

Change Yuan to Euro or Dollar. Now, it has a the regional scope of the article…

Please, recalculate the ecological services to 1km of the river or 1 km2 of catchment. This will be more practical results of your paper.

The manuscript must be carefully check by professional language services.

One again, carefully read the manuscript and improve it. What means (2) l. 418. Please improve and impart a scientific dimension.

At some places there are lack of reference (e.g. l. 68). What’s more in the manuscript a double way of citing literature dominates e.g.  l. 173 (Zhao et al.; Li; Ouyang et al.) [22-24]. Please, check all the manuscript carefully and improve the mistakes.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

General comments:

- It would be good for the authors to dedicate 1-2 paragraphs -preferably in the Introduction- on explaining the differentiation of the term "Ecological Service System Value" from the mainstream research field of "Ecosystem Services Value (ESSV)", along with some references -if any existing- or a substantiation why this term should be used distinctively from ESSV. Or, do the authors consider the two terms equivalent? If that is the case, why?

- Please shorten the monetary equivalents as much as possible by shortening the base and increasing the exponent respectively (e.g. in lines 19, 21, 22 etc.), while also providing an international currency equivalent of the Yuan (in USD, EUR or both) for the reader to have a better grasp of the value in international monetary scales.

Comments on the research paper:

- Lines 26-63 (Introduction) need significant vocabulary and grammar corrections, although the target of the study is adequately conveyed.

- Line 79: The author is "Ayres" not Aryes. Please correct accordingly wherever necessary in the text.

- In section 3.1 it is recommended to present the total valuation formula, as each one of the 4 categories has a different approach and -hence- a different calculation sub-formula. Although the authors present separately each part of the formula, it would be nice to have the integrated form near Table 2.

- In Section 4 it is recommended to use between 2-4 decimals; not less, not more.

- In Section 4.2.1, storage value must have a minimum of relation to flood prevention. Instead of a simple deterministic approach by the market value, the authors should perhaps further discuss a stochastic framework considering the flood probability prevention as well. If there is already that framework (in the literature), then present its most important elements accordingly.

- In section 4.3.2 the authors need to elaborate more on the activities making the scientific research value. What is exactly variable P7 in the equation as an average? The average expenses of scientists visiting the area, per unit of surface? The value of biodiversity is not included? Additionally, is this value uniform or has significant spatial variability? Although the authors claim that this is an average value thay should elaborate significantly on what exactly constitutes this value and how this is distributed spatially (via a map if possibe).

- Line 384: The author is "Constanza" not "Constanzar". Please correct.

- In Section 4.4.2 please elaborate more on the variables used via the literature. Specifically, Constanza (along with other authors) have published new researches (more recent than 1997) on the estimation of global ecosystem services that include the area of interest. If the authors are to use data from the literature, they should seek the most recent sources.

- Table 5 should also include percentages of the total ecosystem value, as the authors discuss this aspect later.

- As the authors discuss the measures and projects prepared from the Chinese government to upgrade the ecosystem health of Tarim River Basin, it is recommended that they should dedicate in the conclusions 1-2 paragraphs on which projects could be considered more suitable and for which ecosystem service value categories. Besides that, do the authors see a trade-off between these projects? If -for example- the Chinese government chooses to increase the hydropower value of the river basin, would it cause a decrease in the value of ecosystem services of the other categories (e.g. habitat, aesthetic, storage etc.)? In general, do the authors see synergistic, competitive or a combination of effects for the aspects constituting total ecosystem value? No need to make a quantitative analysis (this could be a future research by itself), just discuss.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no more comments

Author Response

Please see the attachment!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

General Comments:

1) Significant improvements have been made and the manuscript quality has upgraded significantly.

2) It is highly recommended to transform the monetary value results into 10^9 USD (billions of IS dollars) instead of 10^8. It is easier for the reader to get a grip of the value. Please follow accordingly for any other value and better choose to present it in divisions of 3; e.g. either 10^3 (thousands), 10^6 (millions), 10^9 (billions), 10^12 (trillions) etc.. Eventually, as I understand the total ecosystem services value of Tarim River Basin is ~96 billion (10^9) USD.

3) According to observation2) above, do so in line 367.

Specific Comments:

1) Line 30: Perhaps you need to rephrase "in arid northwestern China"?

2) Line 68: As far as reference [4] is concerned, are you familiar with older works as well (e.g. Vladimir Vernadsky on the concept of the "Biosphere"). Perhaps you could make a related reference.

3) Line 73: Perhaps you mean "Herman Daly"?

4) Line 91: Liu Gengyuan et al. reference number is missing or is it reference [12] mentioned later? I think it it is missing thoguh, as ref. [12] concerns the work of another author.

5) Lines 213-214, 367 etc.: Please use superscripts for sq. or cubic meters or write as "^2", "^3" etc.. Please adopt accordingly for the rest of the paper.

6) Please, reform Table 1 in order to make a basic distinction of the various categories -especially the one containing the evaluation method.

7) Lines 415: Although you explain the variables of the numerator in Formula 10, why the result is divided in half? Please expalian briefly in a few lines.

8) Table 5: Please modify according to comment 6) on Table 1.

9) Line 571: Reference [7] still has wrong spelling of the author's name (the correct is "Ayres"). Please ,dedicate significant time to correct all such errors concerning the names of authors in your references before finally submitting for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf