Study of Disaster Susceptibility and Economic Vulnerability to Strengthen Disaster Risk Reduction Instruments in Batu City, Indonesia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very interesting. Moreover, it could be interesting to discuss about the repeatibility and flexibility of the proposed method in other and different case study or context in the conclusion section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment for the respones, thank you in advance.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Discussion section is way to small. – conclusions seem to be longer than discussion – please discuss all findings of your paper in relation with the international research in the field and in relation with impact assessment procedures performed locally . Why is this study important at international level? Compare the findings with case studies from other world regions and other planning instruments used. Further discuss the importance of participatory practices in Disaster Risk Reduction.
Minor comments/ suggestions:
- - Figure 1. Could have in the corner the localization of the case study on world map
- - First authors say – “by analyzing panel data from 2015 to 2020 to look the trends in the Level of Disas-72 ter susceptibility and Economic Vulnerability in Batu, East Java.” Then they say “Data for this research were obtained from 2021 to early 2022.” – you should clarify that you collected the data during one or two years for the 2015 – 2020 period.
- - No result is referenced in discussion section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment for the respones, thank you in advance.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper proposes a Disaster Susceptibility Rate and an Economic Vulnerability Index to disasters in a specific tourist city in Java, Indonesia. The analysis is applied to five hazards: floods; landslides; drought; land fire; and, COVID-19. The Introduction needs to be improved, with a larger and updated state of the art that allows to understand the different dynamics of the five studied hazards. Also, the rationale for proposing new susceptibility and economic vulnerability indexes has to be clarified, stating clearly the shortcoming of existing methodologies and the advances of the proposed ones. As it stands the analyses and paper focus are too local and do not allow for more general conclusions or applications.
The models presented and the variables' parameterization are solid. Nevertheless, the interaction between the two measures are not clear, mainly in the presentation of the final results.
The paper's English has to bee substantially reviewed by a native speaker, ans many sentences are incoherent or not well structured.
Author Response
Please see the attachment for the respones, thank you in advance.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
