The Novel Paradigm of Economics Driven for Local Smart Sustain Cities Modeling Using Exploratory Factor Analysis and Planning Technique Using Fuzzy Evaluation Decision Making
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is well structured.
It probably deserved the addition of a theoretical point between the introduction and the theoretical review (with the matrix it presents).
The quality of the graphics and images displayed could be improved. However, the article makes a fantastic contribution to science and the sustainability of cities.
Author Response
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your kind advise, I had done revision as your advice below ("Please see the attachment")
Point 1: Extensive editing of English language and style required.
Response 1: English language has rechecked and improved.
Point 2: It probably deserved the addition of a theoretical point between the introduction and the theoretical review (with the matrix it presents).
Response 2: Rearranged and Added (line no. 60-106).
Point 3: The quality of the graphics and images displayed could be improved.
Response 3: The quality of the graphics and images all improved.
Your kind advice is highly appreciated
Best Regards,
Mode
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The introduction section (1) should introduce the rest of the paper in order to be clear what will be explained.
The main aims of the paper should be clarified in the beginning of the text.
In general terms, figures/tables would be discussed in the text to extract some conclusions.
Figure 15 cannot be read.
Author Response
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your kind advise, I had done revision as your advice below ("Please see the attachment")
Point 1: Extensive editing of English language and style required.
Response 1: English language has rechecked and improved.
Point 2: The introduction section (1) should introduce the rest of the paper in order to be clear what will be explained.
Response 2: Introduction has rearranged and added to explain the rest of paper (line no. 60-106).
Point 3: The main aims of the paper should be clarified in the beginning of the text.
Response 3: in abstract (line no 3.-13) and added more in an introduction (line no. 90-106).
Point 4: In general terms, figures/tables would be discussed in the text to extract some conclusions.
Response 4: Added more (line no.68-78, 79-102, 124-130, revised 234-243, result and discussion rearranged and added more line no.325-327).
Point 5: Figure 15 cannot be read.
Response 5: Figure 15 (before revision) and all pictures have improved (figure 16, after revision).
Your kind advice is highly appreciated.
Best Regards,
Mode
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
All in all, an interessting and sucessfull article about a research gap in the field of Smart Cities, with an appropriate methodological approach to fill it. Especially, the consideration of the factor „local context“ is very usable for further application of a theroretical concept.
There is, however, room for improvement:
The promise of creating a Smart City model that is unique in sustainability is not really being kept. By referring to the shared core driver "economics", a connection between Smart City and sustainability concepts is indicatet but the idea is not pursued in depth further, especially in the visualization of the LSSCM.The qualitative part of the research method is not described sufficiently and reflected. No conclusions can be drawn about the quality criteria of empirical research.
The discussion of the results does not go beyond a mere description. For example, a few thoughts on how this paper is of use for planners and decisions makers would round off the whole thing nicely. It would also be useful to have an outlook on future research needs based on the findings.
Author Response
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your kind advice, I had done revision as your advice below ("Please see the attachment")
Point 1: English language and style are fine/minor spell check required .
Response 1: English language has rechecked and improved.
Point 2: The promise of creating a Smart City model that is unique in sustainability is not really being kept. By referring to the shared core driver "economics", a connection between Smart City and sustainability concepts is indicate but the idea is not pursued in depth further, especially in the visualization of the LSSCM.
Response 2: Rearranged and Added more to explain and pursue. (line no. 124-130, and in the result line no.301-324, and added more 325-327).
Point 3: The qualitative part of the research method is not described sufficiently and reflected. No conclusions can be drawn about the quality criteria of empirical research.
Response 3: Added (line no.90-102, 181-189, New Subject Factor analysis and EFA method in line no.191-216).
Point 4:The discussion of the results does not go beyond a mere description. For example, a few thoughts on how this paper is of use for planners and decisions makers would round off the whole thing nicely. It would also be useful to have an outlook on future research needs based on the findings. .
Response 4: Added (line no.325-327, 390-401,405-411).
Your kind advice is highly appreciated
Best Regards,
Mode
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
