Next Article in Journal
Adaptive Predictive Control with Neuro-Fuzzy Parameter Estimation for Microgrid Grid-Forming Converters
Next Article in Special Issue
Towards Sustainable I4.0: Key Skill Areas for Project Managers in GCC Construction Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Role Reversal! Financial Performance as an Antecedent of ESG: The Moderating Effect of Total Quality Management
Previous Article in Special Issue
Dynamic Portfolio Selection in Gas Transmission Projects Considering Sustainable Strategic Alignment and Project Interdependencies through Value Analysis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

New Approach for Managing Sustainability in Projects

Sustainability 2021, 13(13), 7037; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137037
by María Pilar de la Cruz López 1, Juan José Cartelle Barros 2,*, Alfredo del Caño Gochi 1 and Manuel Lara Coira 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Sustainability 2021, 13(13), 7037; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137037
Submission received: 31 May 2021 / Revised: 17 June 2021 / Accepted: 20 June 2021 / Published: 23 June 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainability and Project Management)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to see more recent literature (mostly last 2-3 years) as well as practical implications of the study clearly stated.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

 

Reviewer 1

 

We would like to thank this reviewer for the valuable comments that served to enhance the quality of the paper. We hope that the new version of the manuscript meets your expectations. We have addressed all the comments by using the “track changes” function of Word.

 

The complete text were carefully reviewed by all authors with the objective of identifying grammatical errors and typos. The text was also reviewed by a graduate in English philology. Several changes were introduced. On the other hand, during the review process, we had the opportunity of interviewing some additional experts that were previously contacted for the Delphi Analysis. Their opinions were included in the new version of the manuscript.

 

Please find here enclosed a detailed list with the answers to all your comments.

 

I would like to see more recent literature (mostly last 2-3 years) as well as practical implications of the study clearly stated.

 

We have solved this comment by adding new references. In particular, the following references were included:

 

  • Armenia, S.; Dangelico, R.M.; Nonino, F.; Pompei, A. Sustainable Project Management: A Conceptualization-Oriented Review and a Framework Proposal for Future Studies. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2664.
  • Kiesnere, A.L.; Baumgartner, R.J. Sustainability management in practice: Organizational change for sustainability in smaller large-sized companies in Austria. Sustain. 2019, 11, 572.
  • Silvius, A.J.G.; de Graaf, M. Exploring the project manager’s intention to address sustainability in the project board. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 1226–1240.
  • Silvius, G.; Schipper, R. Exploring variety in factors that stimulate project managers to address sustainability issues. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2020, 38, 353–367.
  • Toljaga-Nikolić, D.; Todorović, M.; Dobrota, M.; Obradović, T.; Obradović, V. Project management and sustainability: Playing trick or treat with the planet. Sustain. 2020, 12, 8619.
  • Goel, A.; Ganesh, L.S.; Kaur, A. Sustainability integration in the management of construction projects: A morphological analysis of over two decades’ research literature. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 236, 117676.
  • Dobrovolskienė, N.; Pozniak, A.; Tvaronavičienė, M. Assessment of the sustainability of a real estate project using multi-criteria decision making. Sustain. 2021, 13, 4352.
  • Martins, V.W.B.; Rampasso, I.S.; Anholon, R.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Leal Filho, W. Knowledge management in the context of sustainability: Literature review and opportunities for future research. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 489–500.
  • Tejedor, G.; Segalàs, J.; Barrón, Á.; Fernández-Morilla, M.; Fuertes, M.T.; Ruiz-Morales, J.; Gutiérrez, I.; García-González, E.; Aramburuzabala, P.; Hernández, À. Didactic strategies to promote competencies in sustainability. 2019, 11, 2086.

 

We also included the most relevant practical implications of this study:

 

[…]

 

The objective of this article, aimed at researchers and practitioners, is to define proposals, within the framework of project management, on how to establish, control and, in general, manage the project's sustainability objective, in order to ensure its fulfilment. By adopting the proposals here presented, it will be possible not only to obtain more sustainable deliverables (products, services or processes) but also to integrate sustainability in the management of processes. In other words, sustainability integration will be achieved at the level of both content and processes [20,25]. Consequently, there will be practical implications for the society, environment and also for the organisations adopting the proposals. More sustainable project deliverables and management practices should lead to: more efficient use of resources, raw materials and energy (less consumption and, consequently, less negative impacts on the planet); stakeholder participation in the decision-making processes; secure and quality jobs creation (employee-friendly companies), among many other positive impacts [18]. All of this without losing sight of most companies’ main objective: to be economically profitable. In this connection, companies are likely to increase their profits. There are several reasons for that. On the one hand, lower resource and energy consumption will result in a cost reduction. Furthermore, the integration of sustainability issues will also provide a reputational benefit compared to companies that follow the traditional model, generating an increase in sales and revenues [18]. In fact, the companies that are more likely to survive and to achieve business success in the future will be those that effectively integrate sustainability [22].

On the other hand, not all the practical implications for the companies are positive. There can be important differences among large, medium and small-sized organizations, since they do not have the same level of resources and, therefore, the same capacity to make the necessary changes. Furthermore, project management is a very complex subject in itself, so the introduction of new procedures may not be welcomed by many project managers and organisations. In this context, a cultural change is needed, in which universities must be the driving force for knowledge generation [30,31]. Therefore, we believe that studies like the one presented here are necessary to help the development and entrenchment of a mind-set to consider sustainability aspects in project management, providing a guarantee for our future [22].

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The submitted study is interesting and original.
Nevertheless, there are some improvements required before publication, as follows:
i) It is an untypical paper regarding the article’s structure. There is a  lack of sections: materials and methods and research results.
ii) the Author(s) should provide an in-depth explanation of why these studies are needed?
iii) The conclusions require a more detailed explanation. I would recommend highlighting empirical research results.
iv) There are many acronyms, which have to be developed.
v) The use of a graphical solution might be beneficial to understand the idea of the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Reviewer 2

 

We would like to thank this reviewer for the valuable comments that served to enhance the quality of the paper. We hope that the new version of the manuscript meets your expectations. We have addressed all the comments by using the “track changes” function of Word.

 

The complete text were carefully reviewed by all authors with the objective of identifying grammatical errors and typos. The text was also reviewed by a graduate in English philology. Several changes were introduced. On the other hand, during the review process, we had the opportunity of interviewing some additional experts that were previously contacted for the Delphi Analysis. Their opinions were included in the new version of the manuscript.

 

Please find here enclosed a detailed list with the answers to all your comments.

 

The submitted study is interesting and original.

 

Thank you for this comment. We appreciate you consider our study as interesting.

 

  1. i) It is an untypical paper regarding the article’s structure. There is a lack of sections: materials and methods and research results.

 

This comment was solved. We have modified the previous structure of the article by including a section of Materials and Methods and a Section of Research Results. Consequently, previous sections and sub-sections were renumbered.

 

[…]

 

  1. Materials and Methods

Three of the authors have extensive experience in project management, and all of them teach or have taught energy and construction engineering subjects, in which they have included sustainability aspects (sustainable design, sustainability assessment and optimisation). Three of them started to do so more than 20 years ago. In 2014, two of the authors decided to incorporate sustainability into a subject on project management, in a Master's degree in Industrial Engineering. After analysing the state of the art at the time, they realised that the approach advocated was always cross-cutting, incorporating aspects of sustainability into traditional project management processes (scope, time, cost, etc.). However, they addressed their teaching by establishing a set of processes to define and meet the project's sustainability objective. In 2015 they published their first ideas in this regard [37].Since then, these ideas have evolved through consultation of the literature on the subject; ongoing reflection by lecturers in their teaching activity; questions and discussions with students, many of whom are both studying and working; feedback from private sector professionals; and various research activities on sustainability carried out with the other two authors of this article. In 2021, it was found that the state of the art was still focused on cross-cutting issues, and it was considered appropriate to disseminate the new proposals more widely, as they had already reached a certain level of maturity.

In order for the proposals to have a greater capacity to influence the professional community, they have been written in such a way that they can be integrated into the two most widely used certification standards: the PMBOK [32] and the IPMA ICB [33].

Finally, to carry out a first validation, a Delphi analysis has been carried out. Two iterations have been made. Opinions and evaluations were obtained from 17 people, with [minimum, average, maximum] professional or academic experience of [7, 25, 50] years in project engineering and management. The university education of these experts is varied (BE Product Design; BSc Electrical, Mechanical, and Industrial Engineering; MSc and PhD Industrial Engineering; BSc, MSc and PhD Chemical Engineering; BSc, MSc and PhD in Civil Engineering; BSc, MSc and PhD in Agricultural Engineering; MS in Project Management; MS in Environmental and Occupational Risks; MBA). All of them have more than one university degree. Seven of them are or have been certified as project management professionals, by either the PMI or the IPMA.

They worked in agricultural, rural development, equipment manufacturing, construction (building, industrial plants, public infrastructures), urban planning, energy, information technology, organisational change, educational, and R&D&I projects, both domestically and internationally. Some of them also worked in engineering and project management consultancy.

The positions of these people throughout their professional career in the private sector are also varied, including project engineer, consultant, senior researcher, project manager, Engineering and Consultancy Manager, Supply Chain Manager, Operations Manager, Managing Director and CEO positions. As for the ones in Academia, these persons currently hold the positions of Associate or Full Professor, and almost all of them have previous experience in the private sector.

After a full explanation of all the aspects covered in this work, the respondents answered questions related to the likelihood that the top management would support these ideas in their organisations, and to the feasibility of implementing these proposals. They also evaluated the approach as a whole. In all cases, a discussion took place in which the interviewees brought a variety of opinions and ideas, many of which have been summarised in this article.

 

[…]

 

  1. Delphi Analysis. Research Results

 Section 2 has summarised the characteristics of the Delphi analysis carried out. With regard to the assessment made by the respondents, they consider, firstly, that the [minimum, average, maximum] probability that the top management will support this type of processes (real support, including the needed resources), in the largest organisations with the highest project management maturity, is of the order of [50%, 75%, 90%]. They estimate that these figures may be in the order of [10%, 38%, 80%], in small organisations (e.g. small and medium sized-sized enterprises (SMEs)) with the lowest project management maturity. Please note that some respondents have answered with a range of values, and in these cases the average of that range is used. On a different note, the variability found, in general, and particularly when discussing small organisations, is due to the fact that the number of such organisations is much larger than that of large companies and institutions, and their characteristics can be very varied, even in advanced countries. In addition, each interviewee has responded according to his or her own real experiences. These comments apply to the remaining assessments, as well as to the comments of the interviewees, which are included below.

Secondly, if the top management supports these proposals (real commitment including the needed resources), they believe that the [minimum, average, maximum] feasibility of their application in the largest projects, carried out by the largest organisations with the highest maturity, is of the order of [50, 74, 95], being 0 no feasibility (total impossibility), and 100 feasibility without any potential problem. At the other end, using the appropriate simplifications discussed here, they estimate these figures to be in the order of [8, 37, 70] for small projects carried out by small organisations with the lowest maturity.

Thirdly, they have also estimated the potential usefulness and effectiveness of the complete set of proposals made here with a number from 0 to 100. The [minimum, average, maximum] rating was [55, 76, 85]. All assessments have been made in the context of advanced countries, and each interviewee has made the assessment according to his or her knowledge and experience in recent times. Finally, the main comments they made were as follows:

  • As for the likelihood of top management supporting this approach:
  • Probability can be [very high], because of corporate image issues.
  • It can be [high, but not very high], because of the inertia that often exists in quite a few organisations.
  • In small companies with non-professionalised management (e.g. some family-owned SMEs) things are much more difficult.
  • A sustainable project is more profitable in all respects, in the short and long term.
  • Probably, in the long term, the companies that will continue to exist will be those that have a real sustainability strategy.
  • Certain issues can put pressure on organisations to move in this direction. For example, emission costs per ton of pollutant, national waste recovery targets, or occupational accidents.
  • The role of governments is very important; they must send clear and positive messages; for example, issues such as taxes for feeding electricity into the grid, in the case of buildings that generate their own renewable energy, send a pernicious message.
  • It is important that governments and experts are aware that social sustainability is the key to everything. At the moment, many of these people only focus on the environment (which is also necessary), but they forget that social differences are growing and can reach limits that lead to revolts, revolutions or, simply, very serious consequences on the economy, if the majority of the population can only buy the basic necessities. If we solve social sustainability, it will be easier to solve the rest of the problem.
  • With regard to feasibility:
  • In large organisations (be it a product or a service), if the project can be carried out with little or no subcontracting, allowing maximum control over design and production, the feasibility is likely to be very high. At the other end, the atomisation of subcontracting greatly diminishes the feasibility.
  • As in other matters, one thing is top management support, and another the full implementation of these proposals, because in many cases what matters is the corporate image as a marketing tool, but not sustainability.
  • Support that does not involve commitment and resource allocation can only lead to failure.
  • In the same way that has happened with other topics, such as the management of project uncertainty, everyone will gradually enter into it, but not completely, with the difference that sustainability makes things much more complicated than uncertainty management, because it includes issues beyond the mere business.
  • In SMEs the feasibility is lower than in large companies, because they tend to have lower profit and less availability of expert staff, they struggle to survive, and in small projects is difficult to have budget and time for almost anything more than what is being done today.
  • In terms of the sustainability of the project management processes (e.g. face-to-face or on-line meetings?) there is still a long way to go, even in large organisations.
  • Progress on sustainability has been extremely slow for 40 years, but is now starting to be taken seriously.
  • The final change will only come when the majority of funders, sponsors, promoters and clients demand it.
  • Tailoring is essential; these proposals are extremely interesting, but the practical implementation should be as simple and paperless as possible.
  • With respect to the potential usefulness and effectiveness:
  • Will be [very high] as long as it is supported by top management and properly implemented. But it is doubtful that these ideas will be implemented in reality as explained here, at least at the short and even medium term. A major, if not drastic, change in business culture is needed to break the inertia of current habits.
  • It will be [high, but not very high], because today project management is already complex enough to add new things that, besides, are not simple.
  • These proposals, if properly supported and intelligently tailored to each organisation and project, can be very effective.
  • For maximum usefulness and effectiveness, this must be integrated into the corporate culture, and more specifically with the internal quality, safety and environmental systems, with appropriate support from top management.
  • The effectiveness of these approaches can be highly variable; among other things, it depends very much on the culture of each place (region, country) and organisation.
  • For sustainability to have a real impact on organisations, a major debate is needed to generate more knowledge, and then wide dissemination to decision-makers in institutions and companies; training at all levels will be one of the keys. There are still many difficulties for achieving a real change of mentality, which will surely come about gradually.

Other comments and suggestions have been incorporated into the proposals presented here, enriching them.

 

  1. ii) The Author(s) should provide an in-depth explanation of why these studies are needed?

 

This comment was solved by adding new information:

 

[…]

 

The objective of this article, aimed at researchers and practitioners, is to define proposals, within the framework of project management, on how to establish, control and, in general, manage the project's sustainability objective, in order to ensure its fulfilment. By adopting the proposals here presented, it will be possible not only to obtain more sustainable deliverables (products, services or processes) but also to integrate sustainability in the management of processes. In other words, sustainability integration will be achieved at the level of both content and processes [20,25]. Consequently, there will be practical implications for the society, environment and also for the organisations adopting the proposals. More sustainable project deliverables and management practices should lead to: more efficient use of resources, raw materials and energy (less consumption and, consequently, less negative impacts on the planet); stakeholder participation in the decision-making processes; secure and quality jobs creation (employee-friendly companies), among many other positive impacts [18]. All of this without losing sight of most companies’ main objective: to be economically profitable. In this connection, companies are likely to increase their profits. There are several reasons for that. On the one hand, lower resource and energy consumption will result in a cost reduction. Furthermore, the integration of sustainability issues will also provide a reputational benefit compared to companies that follow the traditional model, generating an increase in sales and revenues [18]. In fact, the companies that are more likely to survive and to achieve business success in the future will be those that effectively integrate sustainability [22].

On the other hand, not all the practical implications for the companies are positive. There can be important differences among large, medium and small-sized organizations, since they do not have the same level of resources and, therefore, the same capacity to make the necessary changes. Furthermore, project management is a very complex subject in itself, so the introduction of new procedures may not be welcomed by many project managers and organisations. In this context, a cultural change is needed, in which universities must be the driving force for knowledge generation [30,31]. Therefore, we believe that studies like the one presented here are necessary to help the development and entrenchment of a mind-set to consider sustainability aspects in project management, providing a guarantee for our future [22].

 

iii) The conclusions require a more detailed explanation. I would recommend highlighting empirical research results.

 

We have improved the conclusions section. Empirical results were also highlighted:

 

[…]

  1. Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Developments

This article has summarised the proposals of the authors to date, in terms of the components that an appropriate methodology for managing sustainability in projects should have.

Given that the results of the Delphi analysis are favourable, we can state that, firstly, the purely cross-cutting approach of adding sustainability aspects to existing project management processes (integration, scope, time, cost, etc.) must be abandoned. Sustainability management should be a key management function.

Secondly, there are 3 essential components to consider: (i) principles, (ii) processes and their adaptation to different cases, and (iii) competences. As for the principles proposed by some sources (e.g. [36]), the one on sustainable development should be added, and ideally this principle should prevail over the others.

Regarding processes, a new knowledge area is proposed, specific to project sustainability management (PSM). It should have seven processes: (1) planning PSM; (2) defining a sustainability breakdown structure; (3) establishing the sustainability objective; (4) identifying alternatives to meet it; (5) planning and (6) implementing the sustainability strategy; and (7) carrying out the appropriate monitoring and control. The interrelationships (cross-cutting) between these processes and the other initiation, planning, implementation, control, and closure ones, should also be considered. The proposals made here should also be taken into account in order to simplify these processes in small, low complexity projects developed by low maturity organisations, among other cases.

Concerning the competences of the project manager, although there are proposals (e.g. [33]) including some aspects related to sustainability, it is necessary to go further. A new professional practice competence on managing the project's sustainability objective should be defined along the lines described here.

All of the above is a basis for enriching the current standards on the subject ([32,33], among others).

Regarding the results of the Delphi analysis, firstly, the probability that the top management will support these ideas is in the order of 75% for mega-organisations with the highest project management maturity. In small organisations (e.g. SMEs) with the lowest project management maturity, these figures may be in the order of 35%, but with a higher variability. Secondly, if the top management supports these proposals, the feasibility of their application in major projects carried out by the largest organisations with the highest maturity, is of the order of 70, being 0 no feasibility, and 100 feasibility without any potential problem. At the other end, using the suitable simplifications discussed here, these figures could be in the order of 35 for small projects carried out by small organisations with the lowest maturity. External help could be used in these cases. Thirdly, the potential usefulness and effectiveness of the complete set of proposals made here is in the order of 75. Finally, the comments made by the interviewees are of great interest; the reader can find them in the previous section.

With respect to future developments, the processes suggested here should be developed, identifying the possible (1) inputs to be used; (2) methods, techniques, models, and tools to be employed; and (3) outputs to be generated. In addition, detailed flowcharts of PSM activities should be generated, setting out clear descriptions of the mission or purpose of each one, the techniques or tools to be used in it, and the results to be obtained. Methodological simplifications for small, low complexity projects developed by less mature organisations, among other potential cases, will also need more in-depth study. In addition, it will be necessary to define how to assess the competences related to the management of the project’s sustainability objective.

On the other hand, it will be necessary to analyse the differences that may exist between PSM in a traditional approach and that which should be carried out in an agile or hybrid approach to project management. On this basis, it will be necessary to make additions and modifications to the proposals reflected here.

Moreover, it is paramount to analyse the changes that need to be made in the way organisations, project portfolios and programmes are managed, because this is key to facilitating an adequate PSM.

After all this has been done, it must be discussed with project and corporate managers, and with other decision-makers from promoters, design companies, contractors, suppliers, certification bodies, and other stakeholder organisations, through extensive campaigns of interviews, surveys or Delphi analyses. Based on this, the previous results will have to be revised, leading to a final version.

Finally, it is essential that companies and public bodies experiment with the corresponding ideas, observe the results obtained, and improve them progressively, on a continuous basis.

 

  1. iv) There are many acronyms, which have to be developed.

 

All the acronyms were clarified in the text the first time they are mentioned, with the exception of those that are known by all such as: MSc, BSc or PhD.

 

  1. v) The use of a graphical solution might be beneficial to understand the idea of the paper.

 

We have included a Figure for solving this comment:

 

[…]

 

 

Figure 1. Part a). PSM processes and main interrelations with the other project management processes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Part b). PSM processes and main interrelations with the other project management processes.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

The paper that you prepared contribute to the development of the sustainability management field.

I find a notation at the begin of the text "the potential IS of a project" line 183, 185, 188, 189. I didn't find in the text what means "IS".

Thank you for the interesting work!

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Reviewer 3

 

We would like to thank this reviewer for the valuable comments that served to enhance the quality of the paper. We hope that the new version of the manuscript meets your expectations. We have addressed all the comments by using the “track changes” function of Word.

 

The complete text were carefully reviewed by all authors with the objective of identifying grammatical errors and typos. The text was also reviewed by a graduate in English philology. Several changes were introduced. On the other hand, during the review process, we had the opportunity of interviewing some additional experts that were previously contacted for the Delphi Analysis. Their opinions were included in the new version of the manuscript.

 

Please find here enclosed a detailed list with the answers to all your comments.

 

The paper that you prepared contribute to the development of the sustainability management field.

 

Thank you. We really appreciate your comment.

 

I find a notation at the begin of the text "the potential IS of a project" line 183, 185, 188, 189. I didn't find in the text what means "IS".

 

This comment was solved. It was a grammatical mistake derived from the translation Spanish-English. “IS” should be “SI” (Sustainability Index):

 

[…]

 

As with time or cost, one of the problems often faced by the project manager in the early stages of the project, when estimating the potential SI of a project, is related to the uncertainty affecting the value that sustainability indicators will eventually take.

Inevitable project changes can lead to a product not being manufactured, a work not being executed, or a service not being provided as planned. This can be detrimental to the final SI. In these cases, it is sometimes possible to implement corrective measures to increase the SI. With all of the above, the need for an adequate methodological approach, integrated with the rest of the project management activities, is evident.

 

 

Thank you for the interesting work!

 

Thank you for this comment. We really appreciate you consider our study as interesting.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Report on manuscript sustainability-1263403 Lopez:

In the manuscript entitled "New approach for managing sustainability in projects" by Lopez and his/her coworkers, the authors have carried out a detailed investigation on managing sustainability in projects. Based on their proposals, the authors presented a new method to analyze the problem. To lay out their approach, the authors first provided the necessary introduction and background knowledge. Then they started to introduce their new methodology by taking the factors which they believe to be essential while abandoning some processes adopted in the past. Besides of the presentation of the new method, the authors also discussed its future developments by pointing out several directions that one should be aware of.

After carefully going through the manuscript, I found the work is interesting and self-contained. The manuscript is also organized and written well. One can access the content without much difficulty. Moreover, the topic falls well into the scope of the journal and the findings are of high quality.

In my opinion, the work meets the high standards of the journal. As such, I would like to recommend it for consideration in Sustainability. 

I do not find obvious technical issues, although there are some grammatical errors and typos. These can be improved and corrected even in the proof copy stage.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Reviewer 4

 

We would like to thank this reviewer for the valuable comments that served to enhance the quality of the paper. We hope that the new version of the manuscript meets your expectations. We have addressed all the comments by using the “track changes” function of Word.

 

The complete text were carefully reviewed by all authors with the objective of identifying grammatical errors and typos. The text was also reviewed by a graduate in English philology.  Several changes were introduced. On the other hand, during the review process, we had the opportunity of interviewing some additional experts that were previously contacted for the Delphi Analysis. Their opinions were included in the new version of the manuscript.

 

Please find here enclosed a detailed list with the answers to all your comments.

 

After carefully going through the manuscript, I found the work is interesting and self-contained. The manuscript is also organized and written well. One can access the content without much difficulty. Moreover, the topic falls well into the scope of the journal and the findings are of high quality.

 

In my opinion, the work meets the high standards of the journal. As such, I would like to recommend it for consideration in Sustainability.

 

I do not find obvious technical issues, although there are some grammatical errors and typos. These can be improved and corrected even in the proof copy stage.

 

Thank you for this comment. We really appreciate you consider our study as interesting. We have carefully reviewed the entire text with the objective of correcting grammatical errors and typos. The text was also reviewed by a graduate in English philology.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop