Dear colleagues,

meanwhile we received two comments of referees as well as your public answers to their comments.
As you may have recognized, there is a strong agreement among the referees that your short communication would gain if you include some of the issues on CCA and DRR in Europe which is beyond the statements made in the EEA report. In contrast, you argued that during the review process of the report considerable consultation with stakeholders from science and policy took place, which lead to the final statements made in the final (EEA) report.
As you have stated in your response to referee #2, you have already revised the manuscript considering the suggestions made by the referees, also including the issues raised by referee #1 (stakeholder engagement…). So I kindly invite you to upload the revised version so that we can have a second round.
Considering the comment of referee #2 about the definitions: you could also think about an “online supplement” or “appendix” to your article, this will not increase the page numbers, nr the limit with respect to references.
I would like to thank you for your patience during the open discussion phase, and I am looking forward to receiving your finalized manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sven Fuchs (Editor NHESS)

Dear Dr. Mysiak,
again I would like to thank you for your patience during manuscript evaluation and revision.
I am happy to inform you that your manuscript is now accepted for final publication in NHESS.

One technical issue: could you please insert a note that the "Endnotes can be found in the online supplementary material" or so, so that those readers only accessing the core text know where to find information on Endnotes.

Kind regards, and good success with your work,

Sven Fuchs (Editor NHESS)