Developing an Indicator-Based Framework to Measure Sustainable Tourism in Romania. A Territorial Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept in present form.

Author Response

Dear Prof.,

Thank you very much for your valuable comments and observations.

Best regards!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Specifying indicators for evaluation of sustainable tourism development in a given country seems to be really important task. The authors use Romania as an appropriate representative example. Their study is generally well-done, and the paper is interesting. It is also of big methodological importance. It can be considered for publication after certain improvements.

• Abstract: please, re-write it totally focusing on the problem stating and your findings.
• Lines 45-48: please, give citation to these statistics.
• 1: please, propose another caption.
• Please, indicate which forms of tourism you judge as sustainable – rural, eco-, geo-, gastronomic, etc.
• Indicators: why gas is considered? I do not question, but ask to explain. And which roads? What about railway, airports, and seaports?
• Section 4: Results MUST be separated from Discussion. This is standard requirement in all international journals. Results: only your findings. Discussion: interpretations of results, hypotheses, implications, etc. In this paper, Discussion can include the typology of the LAU's and some information from Conclusions.
• Conclusions: please, leave there the only summary of findings from Results and Discussion.
• In this paper, you need to discuss the limitations. In my opinion, the main limitation is a subjective choice of indicators, although this does not weaken the analysis.
• On many figures legends are almost invisible. Please, enlarge!
• References: you need to cite more fresh literature, including articles about sustainable tourism and Romanian tourism and published in international journals in the past 3 years.
• Linguistic polishing is necessary.

Author Response

Dear Prof.,

Thank you very much for your valuable comments and suggestions! Please see attached the responses.

Best regards!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is well structured, detailed and the comprehensive analysis sits within and contributes to an understanding of the geography of Romania. I have a few minor details and one more substantive issue to list. Minor points first:

Abstract: can the breakdown in tourism numbers between locals and foreigners be given?

54-55 Why does an increasingly stressful lifestyle make tourism grow?

80 There is a distinction to be made between minimising negative environmental effects and avoiding them altogether; I do not like the 'misleading' there.

86 and elsewhere. I have never seen before the use of a reference number as a name. If this is some sort of new development I do not like it!

153 the opening bracket is not matched by a later closing bracket which creates more confusion in a passage that is already difficult to follow.

Table 1 You have natural gas as one of the indicators. How long will that be a valid measure as we move towards an energy supply more focused on renewables?

My main issue relates to the Covid-19 pandemic. I am sure that you conceived and at least commenced your analysis prior to the pandemic. You do make mention of it and around line 382 acknowledge that it provides 'new challenges for sustainable tourism development'. I don't think that is sufficient. Tourism has been devastated for at least 2020 and 2021 by the pandemic and indeed it may never be the same in a post-pandemic world (assuming we get that far). I think you need a longer, stronger statement about the potential impact of Covid-19. As it stands what you have just seems to be an add-on.

Author Response

Dear Prof.,

Thank you very much for your valuable comments and suggestions. Please see in attached file the responses. The English language was also revised.

Best regards!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf