Next Article in Journal
Prefabricated Engineered Timber Schools in the United Kingdom: Challenges and Opportunities
Next Article in Special Issue
Integrated Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Method to Analyze Green Management Practice in Hospitality Industry in the Sultanate of Oman
Previous Article in Journal
Carbon Emissions and Brazilian Ethanol Prices: Are They Correlated? An Econophysics Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Influence of Circular Economy Phenomenon to Fulfil Global Sustainable Development Goal: Perspective from Bangladesh
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Process to Select Waste-to-Energy Technology in Developing Countries: The Case of Ghana

Sustainability 2021, 13(22), 12863; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212863
by Adebayo Agbejule 1, Ahm Shamsuzzoha 2,*, Kodjovi Lotchi 3 and Kendall Rutledge 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2021, 13(22), 12863; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212863
Submission received: 22 October 2021 / Revised: 15 November 2021 / Accepted: 17 November 2021 / Published: 20 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Circular Economy for Sustainable Manufacturing)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The goal of the study is to use the analytical process 16 hierarchy (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The paper is interesting however there are many typos and English mistakes.

Author Response

Response to reviewer 1 comments: Manuscript ID: sustainability-1453567

 

General Comments

Authors Response

 

(V) We noticed that you cited reference[22][24][25] in the caption of Table
1, [36] in Figure 1, [43] in the Figure 3, [53] in Figure 7, [46] in Table 6.
Please confirm whether the figure/table is directly referenced without
modification. If the figure/table is modified by the author, please add
"Source: Author" in the footnote of figure/table. If you cited the
figure/table directly, please make sure to get permission from the source and
provide a copy of the relevant certificate to the editorial office to avoid
copyright issue.

OK. Thanks for the constructive comments. Table 1, Figure 1, Figure 3, and Figure have been revised and clarified. For example,

 

The source with Table 6 has been deleted. Reference is made in the text. The title for the table is: Intensity of preference scale for pairwise comparison. The new sentence reads: “Ten experts were asked to make a pairwise comparison between criteria and sub-criteria on a nine-point scale adopted from [46].

 

REVIEWER 1

Reviewer  Comment

Authors response

 

The goal of the study is to use the analytical process 16 hierarchy (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The paper is interesting however there are many typos and English mistakes.

 

OK. Thank you for pointing this out: The sentence has been written as:

The goal of the study is to use the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to select appropriate waste-to-energy technology for the city of Accra. The language of the paper has also been checked by a native English speaker for typos and English mistakes accordingly.

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors presented an interesting and actual article that presents a real case study and can contribute to presenting a solution for the presented problem.

The authors must refer precisely this situation in the introduction, showing how the issue is important and how can contribute to a solution.

I don't like when is a section numbered, for example 1. Introoduction, followed by text, and after arrives a subsection numbered 1.1... The authors must avoid this because it is not correct. Include a subsection 1.1. Framework, for example, and after the previous 1.1 will pass to 1.2.

The same recommendation applies to all sections.

The quality of the figures is poor. Must improve and avoid excessive colours.

The authors must create their own Figure 3 instead of using this poor quality figure presented in the text.

To present a figure such as a Figure 5, must include a legend, a scale, north orientation and the relative position of Ghana in Africa. But it may be redundant because everybody knows where Ghana is. So, consider removing the figure.

Methodology should be section 2.

Author Response

Response to reviewer 2 comments: Manuscript ID: sustainability-1453567

 

REVIEWER 2

Reviewers Comments

Authors’ responses

 

The authors must refer precisely this situation in the introduction, showing how the issue is important and how can contribute to a solution.

 

 OK. Thank you for the comment. Additional elaboration has been added: For example, we have rewritten the introduction to include the sentences below:

 

“Properly addressing the disposal of these wastes contributes to indirect progress concerning global greenhouse gas emission and transitioning towards global environmental sustainability standards. Efficient management of municipal solid waste also contributes to the economic development of a city or country. With multiple WtE technologies available, localities have a challenge when comparing the technologies for selecting which is more optimal for their circumstances.” 

.

 

“ Moreover, WTE technologies promote hybrid waste to energy plants in Ghana that create new jobs and sustainable solutions for the solid waste disposal and management problems in the country. Furthermore, WTE technologies would contribute to saving a lot of emissions of environmentally harmful gases each year in Ghana, which ultimately facilitates Ghana’s climate change mitigation strategy.”

 

I don't like when is a section numbered, for example 1. Introduction, followed by text, and after arrives a subsection numbered 1.1... The authors must avoid this because it is not correct. Include a subsection 1.1. Framework, for example, and after the previous 1.1 will pass to 1.2.

The same recommendation applies to all sections.

 

OK. This has been corrected as suggested following sample articles from the

Mdpi publication.

The quality of the figures is poor. Must improve and avoid excessive colours.

 

OK. The quality of the figures has been improved as suggested.

The authors must create their own Figure 3 instead of using this poor-quality figure presented in the text.

 

OK. Thank you for the correction. The quality of Figure 3 has been improved.

To present a figure such as a Figure 5, must include a legend, a scale, north orientation and the relative position of Ghana in Africa. But it may be redundant because everybody knows where Ghana is. So, consider removing the figure.

 

OK. Very grateful for the comment. Figure 5 has been deleted.

Methodology should be section 2.

 

OK. Thank you for the comment. The Methodology is in Section 2

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors addressed all my questions. For that reason I recommend to be published.

Back to TopTop