Impact of Landscape Management Scenarios on Ecosystem Service Values in Central Ethiopia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript, based on future land use data, calculated the ESV and habitat quality of central Ethiopia, and puts forward scenarios to ecological protection. It is of great significance for regional ecological protection. However, there are still some problems to be solved in the current version.

 Major comments

(1)I suggest that the authors focus on the synergy of persuasion between different types of ES in different scenarios, rather than just ESV, because the land use data has been fixed.

After distinguishing the types of ES, the discussion will be richer and the conclusions will be more accurate.

(2)What is the help of habitat quality for scenario selection? Does habitat quality belong to ES?

(3)Where is machine learning embodied? Land use data is obtained by machine learning. But the rest of this paper has nothing to do with machine learning.

 Minor comments

(1)2.1 it is necessary to introduce the relationship between the study area and CRV

(2)Abbreviations need to be used after ESV, such as 3.3 "ecosystem service (ES) values changes..."

(3)Re sort the serial number of the chapter

Author Response

Dear, Reviewer 

Greetings

I write this message to submit the revised manuscript. The manuscript was modified as per your comments. Please, find the attached response letter herewith 

regards 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In the introduction add some comment as … “the soil erosion has been reported as a major threat for habitats sustainability. Notably, the natural habitats of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity (referred to as “priority” areas), according to Annex I to Directive 92/43/EEC, are threatened by serious soil erosion (Stefanidis et al., 2021)”

Stefanidis, S., Alexandridis, V., & Ghosal, K. (2022). Assessment of Water-Induced Soil Erosion as a Threat to Natura 2000 Protected Areas in Crete Island, Greece. Sustainability, 14(5), 2738.

In the last paragraph of the introduction the novelty points of the current approach must be highlighted in comparison with other similar research to the best author’s knowledge. State the research gap answered from this research.

The figure 1 must be improved. It is not very informative. At the left image add some text and define location so as the reader understand where is the study area.

In the results it would be useful to add some data and comparison between the results of your analysis (LULC) and Corine 2018 CLC.

In the discussion chapter add some targets for future research based on the results of the current study.

The reference style must be corrected according to the journal template.

 

 

Author Response

Dear, Reviewer 

Greetings from Ethiopia

I write this message to submit the revised manuscript and our response to your comments. Please, find the letter of our response attached herewith

 

regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

1.How did the authors estimate the 16 individuals of ES besides habitat quality? And how to estimated their value including habitat quality? It needs to be explained in the Method.

2.The Conclusion can be obtained directly through LULC and ESV. Therefore, I suggest strengthening the Discussion on Results 3.4. And the Conclusion needs to be more concise and refined.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We thank you so much for your comments. 

I write this letter to submit the revised manuscript based on your comments.

Please, find our response for raised comments and suggestions attached herewith.

 

regards, 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is now ready for publication 

Author Response

Thank you so much!