Next Article in Journal
Improving Future Teachers’ Digital Competence Using Active Methodologies
Previous Article in Journal
Impact of Future Design on Workshop Participants’ Time Preferences
Previous Article in Special Issue
Can We Have Our Cake and Still Eat It? A Review of Flexibility in the Structural Spatial Development and Passenger Transport Relation in Developing Countries
Article
Peer-Review Record

Why Choose to Cycle in a Low-Income Country?

Sustainability 2020, 12(18), 7775; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187775
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2020, 12(18), 7775; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187775
Received: 18 August 2020 / Revised: 7 September 2020 / Accepted: 16 September 2020 / Published: 21 September 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Reviewed article could be  very interesting, but some parts makes me confused and should be improved.

Introductions presenting is too general. The reader has very little idea of the demographic and economic conditions prevailing in the studied area. Such information may have a significant impact on the choice of a low-cost mode of transport such as the bicycle, even if the infrastructural conditions are insufficient.

The map (Fig. 3) shows only two cycling lanes. Are there any plans to develop this type of infrastructure? The reader also has no idea how the city authorities view this type of transport? An interview with city representatives responsible for the development of transport could show the position and possibilities on this part.

There is no more in-depth analysis showing the relationships between the various parts of the survey. The study also lacks reference to the objective situation, the subjective analyzes themselves show only part of a very complex problem.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comments at the second round of the review process. Below are our improvements and responses to your comments.

Point 1: Reviewed article could be  very interesting, but some parts makes me confused and should be improved.

Response 1: Thank you. We tried to improve the confusing parts based on your review.

Point 2: Introductions presenting is too general. The reader has very little idea of the demographic and economic conditions prevailing in the studied area. Such information may have a significant impact on the choice of a low-cost mode of transport such as the bicycle, even if the infrastructural conditions are insufficient.

Response 2: We agree that the demographic and economic conditions are important. So, we added more specific demographic (lines 74-75) and economic information (lines 81-83). The description of the study area now fills a whole page, excluding maps and photos. The description section also has detailed information on local urban mobility (lines 98–108) and transport-related challenges and city plans (lines 109-116). We hope these additions will equip reader with sufficient knowledge of the context.

Point 3: The map (Fig. 3) shows only two cycling lanes. Are there any plans to develop this type of infrastructure? The reader also has no idea how the city authorities view this type of transport? An interview with city representatives responsible for the development of transport could show the position and possibilities on this part.

Response 3: In the first round of the review we added a paragraph on the city plans and now we have added the specific number of kilometers of dedicated bicycle lanes to be built by 2021 (lines 115-116). In addition, we added a sentence explaining the growing incidence of cycling despite the lack of bicycle lanes (lines 113–114). New interviews are difficult to carry out due to the very severe corona situation in Kyrgyzstan, but the article builds on extensive interaction with relevant actors in Kyrgyzstan and we have now also taken into account official municipal documents.

Point 4: There is no more in-depth analysis showing the relationships between the various parts of the survey. The study also lacks reference to the objective situation, the subjective analyzes themselves show only part of a very complex problem.

Response 4: We added more text in Discussion and Conclusion section to highlight the research stages and how they were connected (lines 242 -245). See also our responses to the two points from this reviewer immediately above.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

line 3: high-income instead of high

line 11: developed or high-income countries?

line 81: explane how the city was design for 50000 cars? also explane what is the number 500000 cars? is that the number of cars owned by population or the number of cars coming to city every day...

line 105-109: please refer to the figure 3

line 126: is there 15 or 16 statements because in the table 7 there is 16

line 134: scienties instead of scholars

line 136: Figure 4 (not 3)

line 149: exclude "for"

line 170: please refer to Table 1 in text.

line 176: Table 2 (not 3)

line 183: Figure 5 (not 3)

line 190 and 198:consider more appropriate titles; challenges is not an adequate expression, maybe reasons, obstacles, etc.

line 195: the same for the table title

line 995: from the table it is not clear how the private car is the obstacle for cycling: is it because many cars at the street, is it because many owned cars or...please explane below the table; also explane polluted air and pedestrians

line 194: Figure 6 (not 4)

line 200: Figure 7 (not 5)

line 216: please explane in more detail the logit model

line 222: at the end of the table there is wrong sign, it should be *** not ****

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for your valuable comments at the second round of the review process. We attach Word documents below with our improvements and responses to your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

You have produced a very interesting paper. My first recollections of bicycle "encouragement" policy go back to Chairman Mao's Beijing. Obviously, probably very different reasons to bike were operative then in developing China than the contemporary developing world. The topic is novel, the terrain unexploredm and, as you recognize, for the most part the conclusions you come to not particularly counter-intuitive. Yet some of your findings provoke further elaboration: those categories least prone to use the bicycle, particularly students and females. You give some account of why this may be so, but I believe a more comprehensive attempt at a guess inn your conclusion would be helpful.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for your valuable comments at the second round of the review process. Below are our improvements and responses to your comments.

Point 1: You have produced a very interesting paper. My first recollections of bicycle "encouragement" policy go back to Chairman Mao's Beijing. Obviously, probably very different reasons to bike were operative then in developing China than the contemporary developing world. The topic is novel, the terrain unexplored and, as you recognize, for the most part the conclusions you come to not particularly counter-intuitive. Yet some of your findings provoke further elaboration: those categories least prone to use the bicycle, particularly students and females. You give some account of why this may be so, but I believe a more comprehensive attempt at a guess inn your conclusion would be helpful.

Response 1: Thank you for your kind and encouraging comment. We extrapolated a bit on the role of gender and its possible causes (lines 265 – 267). We also added text on possible reasons why students are less likely to cycle (lines 271 – 275).

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for your responses. I think that is sufficient.

Good luck with the paper

Back to TopTop