BRICS and the Race to Net-Zero Emissions by 2050: Is COVID-19 a Barrier or an Opportunity?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have gone through the manuscript entitled "BRICS and the Race to Net-Zero by 2050: Is COVID-19 a Barrier or an Opportunity?" and found it interesting. However, it seems author did not follow the journal guideline fully such as  use of different font. I would like to suggest acceptance with minor revision.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study examines the effect of Covid-19 on India and South Africa’s net-zero emissions trajectories. The study uses the PRISMA method to compile and assess data from 42 publications. The major conclusion is a decline in Per Capita GHG Emissions for both countries from 2019 to 2020. However, this information is not novel and already publicly available. While this study thoroughly reviews the reduced emission profiles and behavioral changes due to the pandemic, as well as challenges to the net zero pathway, including additional insights gleaned from the meta-analysis would greatly add to the impact of the study.

Comments:

1.    The monthly stringency indices provided are interesting. Could the authors examine the relationship between stricter stringent measures and the corresponding reduction of emissions. For example, how did the pattern of emissions relate with easing of the Covid-19 restrictions? A longer timeframe may need to be examined.

2.    The authors mention a difference in spatial emission ie. discrepancies between cities and general per capita emissions. Can they show a) total emissions for both countries within similar time frames and b) and incorporate breakdown by rural and urban areas?

3.    What might have caused the increase in emissions in Mumbai between 2019-2020? Was this related to stringency measures (or lack thereof)?

4.    How might the authors explain the dip in emissions for South Africa between 2016-2018?

5.    The authors state that a major contributor to the fall in emissions might be the transport sector due to stay at home policies, whereas domestic electricity usage may have increased. Could the authors summarize in a figure the contribution of different sectors such as transport, agriculture, electricity (domestic and commercial), etc.

6.    Table 2: In addition to absolute numbers of industries, the authors should also include the values as percentage of total industries to make effect on different industrial sectors more apparent. Moreover, as a control, the authors should include the numbers for pre-pandemic years as well. These would be expected to be much lower if the liquidations were due to the pandemic.

7.    The authors note that new and small firms have greater potential to introduce and propagate clean energy. Can Table 2 be modified to include this factor (new vs established) and thereby help support the authors claims that new/small industries were more adversely affected?

8.    Can the authors glean any effect on NOx emissions in SA and India given findings by Laughner et al.? Potential implications should be discussed.

9.    Publications such as Kumar et al., 2022 (10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150349), Laughner et al., 2021 (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.210948111) should be cited.

Minor comments

1.    Line 353: “Any study without net- 353 zero emissions, COVID-19, South Africa, and India was removed”- This sentence is ambiguous. Does this mean either COVID-19 and South Africa OR India would have to be present? The exact methodology should be stated.

2.    Line 357: “At this stage, 63 studies were removed” – the reason should be mentioned in the text (in addition to Figure 2).

3.    The point of including the study area map in Figure 1 is not clear. Is geographical location a factor here? Moreover, it does not seem to be at scale, since SA is about half the area of India but is represented as similarly sized.

4.    There are differences in fonts through the paper.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have taken into account the questions and comments and have edited the manuscript satisfactorily