General comments and reply to reviewer #1

Abstract

General comments We would like to thank the reviewers for their very valuable comments. We acknowledge the fact that we were not clear enough in defining the scope of our paper and in particular our usage of a narrow definition of vulnerability and the focus on single-hazard type risk assessment models. We recognize that this may have caused confusion and therefore we have made the following general changes: âȂć We included a more explicit explanation of the scope of our paper: to conduct a literature review comparing methods for quantitatively assessing vulnerability in flood and earthquake risk assessments within which we look at both physical and social vulnerability aspects. âȂć Therefore, we have increased the depth of our analyses by adding 22 C1