Evaluation of Factors Found to Influence Urban Flood Resilience in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this study, evaluation of influencing factors of urban flood resilience in China. As a method, measurement and measurement, ANP and TOPSIS methods were used. Three cities (Zhengzhou, Xi'an, Jina) were chosen as the implementation sites. My recommendations are as follows: The literature contribution of the study should be explained clearly. It should be used to explain why it was chosen. It should be clearly demonstrated that the applied vessels are relatively selected. It can be explained in more detail in later examples. It can be published when the deficiencies are corrected.
Author Response
Responds to the reviewer
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for offering us an opportunity to improve the quality of our submitted manuscript “Evaluation of factors found to influence urban flood resilience in China”. We appreciated very much the reviewers’ constructive and insightful comments. In this revision, we have addressed all of these comments. We hope the revised manuscript has now met the publication standard of your journal.
We have marked all modifications with revision mode.
On the next pages, our point-to-point responses to the queries raised by the reviewers are listed.
Reviewer #1
Comment 1: The literature contribution of the study should be explained clearly. It should be used to explain why it was chosen.
Response 1: Thank for reviewer’s comments. The literature contributions of this study have now been added in the fifth paragraph of Part I. The contributions of the study are highlighted in the revised text. The first two paragraphs of the article introduce the background of the study, with the aim of pointing out the importance of urban flood resilience construction. Paragraphs 3 and 4 briefly describe previous relevant studies on flooding issues. The fifth paragraph summarizes the shortcomings of existing studies and proposes what this study will address.
Comment 2: It should be clearly demonstrated that the applied vessels are relatively selected. It can be explained in more detail in later examples.
Response 2: Thank you for pointing out this. To fill this gap, this study adds 2.1 Method selection on page 3. The section begins with a literature review and Table 2 compares and analyzes existing models and methods for assessing urban flood resilience. An analysis of the rationality of the selected vessel has been added according to your suggestion.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper concerns the important issue of the evaluation of influencing factors of urban flood resilience in China. The study developed a comprehensive evaluation model of flood resilience including an evaluation index system from the basis of four key dimensions of social resilience, economic resilience, ecological environment resilience and infrastructure resilience. The Interpretative Structural modelling was applied to analyze the structural issues affecting urban flood resilience. Also, the Analytic Network Process was then used to calculate the importance of these indicators. Taking three cities (Zhengzhou, Xi 'an and Jinan ) in the Yellow River Basin of China as examples, the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was used to evaluate their current levels of flood resilience using the findings from the earlier stages. The results show that the levels of rainfall and vulnerability of groups were the fundamental factors affecting urban flood resilience. Indicators such as average annual rainfall, fixed asset investment, and emergency rescue capabilities were also found have a greater impact on urban flood resilience. The findings are expected to provide a useful reference for policy makers and stakeholders involved in the management of flooding events. Comments and suggestions: On what base the indicator contents were chosen? Why you chose these particular methods for the analysis? Why this approach is the best solution for performed analysis? The use of expert knowledge is an important point of the research, I believe that further details are needed on this, which experts were involved and did you find any differences or inconsistencies in their belief? The possibilities of the proposed approach could be presented. The Author should underline in conclusions, if obtained results and methods were consulted with Authorities responsible for developing flood safety plans, and if managers consider it as quick and manoeuvrable tool, as the Authors stated that the results are expected to provide a useful reference for policy makers and stakeholders involved in the management of flooding events. Add some information about the perspectives.
Author Response
Responds to the reviewer
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for offering us an opportunity to improve the quality of our submitted manuscript “Evaluation of factors found to influence urban flood resilience in China”. We appreciated very much the reviewers’ constructive and insightful comments. In this revision, we have addressed all of these comments. We hope the revised manuscript has now met the publication standard of your journal.
We have marked all modifications with revision mode.
On the next pages, our point-to-point responses to the queries raised by the reviewers are listed.
Reviewer #2
Comment 1: On what base the indicator contents were chosen?
Response 1: Thank for reviewer’s comments. We have revised this section based on your suggestions. The indicators were selected with reference to the literature review and expert opinion, and some references were added to the revised text to support our view – see the text added to p3, p8.
Comment 2: Why you chose these particular methods for the analysis? Why this approach is the best solution for performed analysis?
Response 2: Thank you for pointing out these shortcomings. In order to more explicitly show the rationale for the chosen methods, we have added 2.1 Method selection on pages 3 and 4. The first paragraph conducted a literature review to review the existing multi-criteria assessment methods, and Table 2 compared and analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of the existing assessment models and methods. The second paragraph discussed the rationality of the chosen method, and the mutual complementarity of the three methods can make up for their shortcomings. Therefore, the ISM-ANP-TOPSIS (Interpretative Structural Modelling, Analytic Network Process, Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution) integrated evaluation model is considered to be the best analysis method for this study.
Comment 3: The use of expert knowledge is an important point of the research, I believe that further details are needed on this, which experts were involved and did you find any differences or inconsistencies in their belief?
Response 3: Thank for reviewer’s comments. We have refined this section based on your suggestions (on pages 8 and 9), and have also added the questionnaire (Appendix 2). This research took into account the divergence of experts' opinions when compiling their opinions, and selected data with an approval rating of 80% and above as valid data.
Comment 4: The possibilities of the proposed approach could be presented.
Response 4: We appreciate this useful suggestion. As per your suggestion. On page 16, we have now added 4.4 Suggestions and Measures.
Comment 5: The Author should underline in conclusions, if obtained results and methods were consulted with Authorities responsible for developing flood safety plans, and if managers consider it as quick and manoeuvrable tool, as the Authors stated that the results are expected to provide a useful reference for policy makers and stakeholders involved in the management of flooding events. Add some information about the perspectives.
Response 5: Thank you these helpful comments. First, the participation of the expert group has been highlighted in the conclusion section. Secondly, in response to your suggestion, we have added some information about the perspectives in the discussion section and provided explanations accordingly. (on page 17 and 18)
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Requested corrections have been made in the article. It can be published as it is.
Reviewer 2 Report
Please consider including in the title of the mansuscript, that it concerns the case studies of three major cities of Zhengzhou, Xi 'an and Jinan.
