Residential Sustainable Water Usage and Water Management: Systematic Review and Future Research
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper provides a summary of the knowledge and challenges concerning residential sustainable water usage and water management. The form of the manuscript is the review. The analysis concerns the 114 articles underscored three orientations for residential water usage and management. Remarks: In the section related to the introduction, it is important to show the uniqueness of this study. The need for this type of research should also be presented. The presentation of the research results is based on very simple statistics. I suggest introducing regression and correlation between variables. Journals listed in the wos database require going beyond simple percentage distributions of variables. In such journals, simple generalisations based on elementary statistics should be avoided. In the part of the introduction, include information about sustainability in water usage and management. Add information, if some analysis was performed using the Scopus repositories? The main achievements of this review should be emphasized in the Conclusion. What lessons should be drawn from this analysis? It should be added in more detailed way. This should be discussed in the point concerning conclusions. Lack of careful analysis of the results of many experiences of cited papers. Review does not indicate a detailed discrepancies in published research results. Line 509-510: add some more detail about sustainable and environmental reasons and economic or societal.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your comments. We took all of them under consideration and made the appropriate changes.
Best regards,
Konstantinos Madias
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic of the paper is interesting and fits the scopes of the Journal. Nevertheless, the manuscript requires some extra efforts to improve its quality and presentation. After a careful revision, a set of comments are given below.
The affiliation of both authors is the same, so it is not required to repeat it.
Citation of references does not match the template of the journal. Namely, numbers between brackets must be used.
Table 1 is very illustrative and proves the knowledge of previous works.
The size of figure 1 is excessive.
This reviewer is happy of finding explicit description of the used databases as well as the search query.
In the fourth section, numbering subsections is missing. For example, the Bibliometric analysis should be 4.1.
It is suggested removing the framework of figure 2. It is commonly added by Excel but it can be removed for a better presentation.
The well-known “H-index” is commonly expressed as “h-index”.
In table 3, in the Paper column, the indication of the journal where the articles are published is not required. However, if the authors consider that is relevant information (it can be seen as related to the table 2), it should be mentioned in the text that describes the table for a proper reading.
In line 470, initial quotation marks are missing.
A section for Declarations is not required.
About the references, the format must be revised to follow the template concerning some aspects like the abbreviated name of the journals, etc.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you so much for your valuable comments, we took all of them under consideration. Please see the attachment below for our reply to your comments.
Best regards,
Konstantinos Madias
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper provides a summary of the knowledge and challenges concerning residential sustainable water usage and water management. The form of the manuscript is the review. The analysis concerns the 114 articles underscored three orientations for residential water usage and management. The manuscript is well-prepared. Remarks: Line 426: The choice of reference should be supplemented with respect to the studies focused on providing information to consumers concluded that information can indeed impact water consumption [e.g. Ref [Pietrucha-Urbanik, K.; Rak, J.R. Consumers’ Perceptions of the Supply of Tap Water in Crisis Situations. Energies 2020, 13, 3617. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13143617]. Line 176-185: The font of the Figure 1. Structured review procedure is too big in comparison to the rest of the text, arrows are behind the boxes. Delete the word [Internet] from the references and DOI number should be presented where possible.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments. We took them into consideration and made the changes you recommended.
Please see the attachment below.
Best regards,
Konstantinos Madias
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
