Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The topic of the paper is not scientifically sound for research paradigm is vague. The title of the paper could be more clear. 2. It is best to follow a mature scientific paradigm to present you research goal and conduct your research thread which is more universal to other place. Your research area could be presented as a case study. 3. The paper is more like a description of project (atlas, fieldwork, system, navigation guidence etc.). More theoretical invstigation and presentation is favorable. 

Author Response

Point 1. The topic of the paper is not scientifically sound for research paradigm is vague. The title of the paper could be more clear.

Response 1. The following is our research program: “ASALM aims to present cartography that displays, on the one hand, the environmental dynamics of Lençóis Maranhenses, and, on the other hand, the activities of those living in the region’s traditional communities” (lines 47-49). It combines the methods, analyses and presentation of scientific geoenvironmental data with a human component: the mental navigational systems of the people who live and work in the area under study. The title of the paper reinforces the notion of a “dialogue” between local knowledge and cartography, focusing on the mental maps of community members.

Points 2 and 3.  2.  It is best to follow a mature scientific paradigm to present your research goal and conduct your research thread which is more universal to other place. Your research area could be presented as a case study. 
3. The paper is more like a description of project (atlas, fieldwork, system, navigation guidance etc.). More theoretical investigation and presentation is favorable. 

Response 2 and 3.  The development of ASALM is based on cybercartographic principles, which, as noted in the revised Introduction, can be considered a “member of the critical cartography clan.” ASALM is a case study in the sense that the paper focuses on this particular atlas, but the more general research themes are: (1) using data from different sources and formats can provide a more holistic perspective of a geographical area, (2) this is possible with new forms of mapping like cybercartography and other forms of critical/participatory cartography, and (3) the universality of mental maps and navigational systems in traditional societies.

Reviewer 2 Report

An enjoyable and informative paper. Perhaps a little more detail on the evolving nature of Cybercartography going beyond references to Taylor and situated in critical cartography literature. I would consider this helpful yet optional given the current length of and important content in the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a very interesting paper and project.  I am recommending publication with minor edits.  Some comments as follows:

Major Comments:

1. The Abstract could be shortened somewhat to about half the length it currently is with a more concise focus.

2.  A more concise summary of the approach and methodology would help following the introduction, before going into details in section 2.  (Perhaps considering moving Figure 4 closer to the beginning of the article?)

3. Note that 'Step 3: Fieldwork' is not explicitly mentioned or indicated in Figure 4.

4. The legends in all of the map figures are difficult to read.  Consider increasing the font and symbol size and/or place the legend in a white box background with black text so the colours do not bleed so easily with the background map.

5. Conclusions.  This section could be shortened.  The first two paragraphs simply repeat what is in the body of the text.  The Conclusions should be concise.  Two questions that should be addressed in the conclusions are: 1) How will the community make direct use of ASALM atlas when it is complete?  2) Also discuss (if needed, flag for future research), how the use of the atlas may affect their traditional guidance systems.  i.e. will their traditional guidance systems diminish with the increased use of more advanced geotechnologies?

6. It is not clear why there are two types of 'References' (Kumikos' and the longer numbered list).  Both should be combined into one style and consistently referenced throughout the text.

Minor comments:

- the 'c' and 'd' labels are missing from the bottom 2 pictures in Figure 3.
- references should be provided along with each Source in Table 1.
- Line 385.  The link to the prototype atlas should be given as a footnote or endnote, or put in the references.
- footnote 3. I am not sure about the term 'hyperdynamics'.  This implies something much beyond normal dynamics of a changing landscape, which is not the case with this study area.
- Line 629.  That is 'transhumance'?  Please expand on this.
- Double check all citations in the text for consistency of style.

Thank you for allowing me to review this manuscript.  Best wishes in advancing this work further.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

no more comments after author's revision. Result should be more focused where data collection and atlas development etc should be placed elsewhere.

Author Response

Point 1: “Result should be more focused where data collection and atlas development etc should be placed elsewhere."


Response 1: We have followed Reviewer 1’s recommendation and moved the first paragraph of section 3.1 (“Data collection”) in the “Results” section to the first paragraph of section 2.2.2 (“Step 2: Data collection and preparation”). We also moved all of section 3.2 (“Digital Cyberatlas – ASALM”) to the end of section 2.2.2. The “Results” section now focuses exclusively on the mental maps and native guidance system of the local inhabitants of Lençois Maranhenses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx