Framework for Assessing Public Transportation Sustainability in Planning and Policy-Making

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

- lines 65-69: "This study presents a Public Transportation Sustainability Indicator List (PTSIL) which outlines 65 the broad concept of public transportation sustainability in detail through representative indicators, 66 and enables assessments within the planning and policy sectors in an integrated manner, 67 incorporating environmental, social and economic dimensions as well as influential aspects related 68 to governance and urban form."

But there are no records regarding what is new and original content of the article,

- Figure 2 - the axis description is missing; there is no formula and description of how the values were calculated,

- Figure 3 - the axis description is missing; there is no formula and description of how the values were calculated,

- Figure 4 - lack of a sufficient description of data on charts in the text; there is no formula and description of how the values were calculated,

- pages 398-412 - what is the impact of conding on the accuracy and errors in presented method of calculating PTSI? There is no example explaining differences in data coding, which results in a low result of Krippendorff’s alpha,

- there is no extended description of the values obtained for the indicators presented on charts.

Author Response

We thank you for your kind and constructive comments that we’ve incorporated into our revised manuscript. Please find our detailed responses to the valuable suggestions you have provided in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

High Quality Manuscript but have a major flaw.

Explanation and concept of applied analysis method is zero.

Authors have formulated manuscript towards a peak of mountain, every thing was going on high quality note but before reaching peak they have fallen without any reason.

Really impressive formulation but need improvement in explanation and implementation of methods.

Some Suggestions to improve are:

Introduction: First line is starting with reference number [89]..Astonishing...First paragraph patronization is under question.

Assessing Public Transport sustainability.....headings are not in order. Patronize..

I guess from first line start 2.1, and so on...

Add a detail Heading of applied method with the help of literature review in conceptual complete detail.

Methodology....Applied method application mechanism not clear (major issue).

Results not well explained.

         Novelty of the work is hidden..

Author Response

We thank you for your kind and constructive comments that we’ve incorporated into our revised manuscript. Please find our detailed responses to the valuable suggestions you have provided in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper “Framework for Assessing Public Transportation Sustainability in Planning and Policy-making” presents a Public Transportation Sustainability Indicator List. In my opinion the content of the paper is adequate for the purposes of the journal.

Title: The title of the paper is informative. It includes important terms and the message of the article.

Keywords: Keywords are well chosen.

Abstract: The abstract describes the context and provide a general picture of the methodological approach. The main outcomes are also described.

Introduction and theoretical background: Introduction defines the focus and explains the structure of the text. Literature review prepares the reader to understand the research part of the article.

Materials and Methods: Materials and methods are extensive discussed.

Discussion, Conclusions and Future Research: Implications, limitations and future research directions should be discussed more detailed. Managerial implications are also missing.

I really enjoyed reading your article. One minor remark: the resolution of Figures 2-4 should be increased.

Author Response

We thank you for your kind and constructive comments that we’ve incorporated into our revised manuscript. Please find our detailed responses to the valuable suggestions you have provided in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The article has been amended in accordance with the comments included in the review. The authors have exhaustively addressed the indicated problems. Now it is much better and suitable for publication.

Reviewer 2 Report

Accepted in current form