Dear Luc Bonnafous and Upmanu Lall,
thank you very much for again for the submission of your manuscript on 'Space-time clustering of climate extremes amplify global climate impacts, leading to fat-tailed risk' and your answers to the two referee reports and the short comments from the scientific community.
These comments include a number of very suitable suggestions to improve your manuscript and make it stronger. From your answers to the referee reports and the short comment, I am positive that you will take them appropriately into account.
As interest from the community seems to be large, I would like to stress the idea to make your code and data publicly available using e.g. GitHub (as one of the referees suggest).

I kindly ask you to take the specific comments of both reviewers into thorough consideration and rework the manuscript accordingly. Sharpening the focus of your paper is an important recommendation. Therefore, I decide on minor revisions.
Please provide a revised marked up (track changes) version of your manuscript to make clear how you include the changes in response to the referee report.

I look forward to receiving the revised version of your manuscript.

Best regards
Kai Schröter

Dear Luc Bonnafous,
many thanks for submitting a revised version of your manuscript. I noticed that the track changes version of your manuscript does not clearly show the modifications made during the revision in comparison to the previous version. This makes it extremely difficult to understand how you implemented the suggested changes by the reviewers. Also please include your response letters and explanations of how you are addressing the referee comments point by point.
I decide on minor revisions to give you the opportunity to rectify these issues. Please also include a link to the git repository of the code when it is available.
Many thanks and best regards
Kai Schröter

Dear Luc Bonnafous and Upmanu Lall,
thank you very much again for the submission of your manuscript on 'Space-time clustering of climate extremes amplify global climate impacts, leading to fat-tailed risk' and the revised version of your manuscript.
I have been going through the referees' comments and your replies as well as the changed version of your manuscript and I would like to ask you to address the following items which have not been clarified sufficiently (pages and line numbers refer to the most recent manuscript version (v6)):

p1 l16 and l22 do you mean spatial-temporal clustering of exposure or rather hazard?

p3 ll 8-15 This is a very long sentence and hard to understand. Please rephrase.

Please include your argument provided in response to referee#2 comment 2 in your data and methods section. I think this is an interesting point to mention.

In your response to referee#2 comment 4, you state "Perhaps the idea that we are looking
globally and not regionally and temporal clustering is due to quasi-periodic climate
phenomena is not well developed at this stage of the paper and we should make that
clear." - It is not obvious where you have made this point clear in your revised manuscript.

p7 Table 1: please indicate an explanation of the symbols used in columns 3-5 to the table caption in a way that the reader is able to understand them without looking up in the text.

p8 Fig 1: y-axis description still missing, Please check if the verbose titles to the different panels are needed or reduced to the commodities?

p11 Fig 4: what do the black arrows indicate? what are the areas surrounded by a black line. Please add this explanation to the caption of the Figure.

p12 Fig 5: please align legend title and figure caption. What does 'hits' represent?

p13 l23: regional spatial extent and timing of droughts or floods.

It is not clear if or how the comment from reviewer#2 'page 11, line 15: the jump in argumentation to parametric insurance is quite arbitrary.' has been addressed.
Indeed parametric insurance is only mentioned on p14, maybe it can be motivated already in the introduction?


Please provide a revised marked up (track changes) version (based on version 6 - the most recent one) of your manuscript to make clear how you include the above-suggested changes.

I look forward to receiving the revised version of your manuscript.

Best regards
Kai Schröter

Dear Luc Bonnafous and Upmanu Lall,

thank you for revising the manuscript and addressing all remaining comments. I think it is now mature for publication in NHESS. Congratulations!

Best regards
Kai Schröter