Water Quality Pollution Control and Watershed Management Based on Community Participation in Maros City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper “Water Quality Pollution Control and Watershed Management Based on Community Participation in the Maros City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia”. It is interesting and offer useful information for water quality pollution control and watershed management in this area. However, there are some concerns that need to be addressed.

Overall, from my point of view, the present study is very complex and difficult to read because it integrates the results of four types of research and also presents too many details/ results that are difficult to understand by readers less familiar with these concepts.

In the section Introduction I suggest the authors to highlight the novelty/ originality of the paper. How does this research differ from other previous studies?

I understand that the authors combine four types of research: observation, in-depth interviews, surveys, and documentation. However, the methodology is not clearly explained. I didn’t understand how the authors proceeded to collect the data and who are the respondents (demographic data about them)? I also suggest the authors to provide more details about the questionnaire used and the interview guide (eventually in Appendix).

Moreover, the results in section 4 cannot be correlated with the methodology section. In other words, which part(s) of the Results section is related to observation, which part is related to the in-depth interviews/ quantitative research/ documentation?

Good luck!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

We hereby thank you very much for suggestions, criticism, and input for improving the article. Furthermore, we have followed up on suggestions, criticism, and input with the following explanation:

1. Additional explanations that show where our study differs from previous studies are described in the introduction (page 3).
2. The deepening of our methodology has been sharpened regarding the suggestion and input we received, with explanations: (a) sharpening research observations (page 9), (b) sharpening in-depth interviews (page 10), (c) sharpening questionnares (page 10), and (d) sharpening documentation (page 11).
3. In accordance with the suggestion and input, we have correlated the result of the research with the methodology we use, namely those related to the observation data, the in-depth interviews that we use and the data from documentation. The explanation related to this we have refined in the part of the data obtained through observation, in-depth interviews, questionnaires, and documentation data.   

That is what we need to convey, hopefully the improvements we have are in accordance with the suggestions and input from the reviewer. We thank you once again for the suggestions, criticism, and input given.

Regards,

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study deals with an exciting topic:  Water Quality Pollution Control and Watershed Management Based on Community Participation.

It is a fascinating paper. Honestly, I have no objection. The authors have produced a very extensive, rigorous, and complete manuscript. It is necessary to recognise the difficulty in tackling a subject as complex as the management of hydrographic basins and the problems of water pollution.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Herewith we thank you very much for your very valuable suggestions and input for improving our article. Futhermore, we have added the substance according to the suggestions and input from reviewer. We include the sharpening of the substance in the results section of the study (page 22-23). Thank you for your very valuable suggestions and input for improving our article.

Regards,

Author  

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf