Dear Authors,

I am generally happy with the way in which you have responded to the Referees' comments, particularly those of Referee 2.

The comments of Referee 1 are particularly related to the framing of the paper, in terms of what is new, what is a review of the authors previous case study works, and what are the authors' thoughts on future directions for the field.

My feeling is that the overall make up of the manuscript is fine, but that the abstract be made slightly more explicit to denote the work that is a synthesis of the authors' previous efforts in the field, and what are considerations for the future.

I don't think the abstract needs to be rewritten: a few additional words inserted for clarity would be fine.

For instance, the sentence, "After an introduction to the topic, the authors present their empirical approach combining household surveys, Participatory Research Approach (PRA) tools and key informant interviews through its application in three case studies in Pakistan, Peru and Tanzania" could be amended slightly to indicate that this study represents a new synthesis of this collection of field studies by the authors.

Similarly, the sentence commencing, "In the future, survey data should be triangulated..." could be prepended with, "The results of our synthesis suggest that...".

Finally, I have a couple of minor wording suggestions.

Page 20 of revised manuscript (tracked version):
Change, "the UIB is experiencing since decades" to, "the UIB has experienced cooling trends in the summer season for decades".
In "increasing or stable precipitations throughout the year" remove "s" from "precipitation".

Page 23:
Change, "This group has increased substantially its income" to "This group has substantially increased its income".

Yours faithfully,

Dr Andy Turner, Guest Editor.