Tourism Environmental Impacts Assessment to Guide Public Authorities towards Sustainable Choices for the Post-COVID Era
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
the topic is interesting and relevant to the current tourism situations, regarding COVID-19, even though the new wave of COVID-19 seems to keep coming.
The author applied LCA methodology. This is a suitable method for the study with the case study environment.
.
The author explored different types of accommenation, ranging from 1-5 star hotels and B &B, covering different aspects of accommodation businesses.
However the justification of the selected sites was insufficient and the author need to explaiin more clearly how the sites were best suited for the current topic and framework. There are also other more popular in Europe. Additional explanation about the selected site should be more appropriate to strengthen the author's choice.
Furthermore the topic of the study may mislead the readers when the study seems to be limited to the hotel context and environment. The author should addresss more clearly, regarding the limitation of study and the degree of generalizability of the findings.
The research discussions were quite limited and should be expanded with the relevant literature and empirical studies. Conclusions were well-written but the author should conclude the main findings and explain how the research study achieve the objectives.
In addition, the author should offer the practical guidelines for the stakeholders, including hotels and accomodations and other stakeholders.
Author Response
Thank you for showing an interest in our article and for your helpful suggestions.
Here are the corrections point by point (also highlighted in the new uploaded text).
- The justification of the selected sites was insufficient and the author need to explaiin more clearly how the sites were best suited for the current topic and framework. There are also other more popular in Europe. Additional explanation about the selected site should be more appropriate to strengthen the author's choice.
Answer: we have explained in more detail the relevance of the chosen case study (line 259-271)
- Furthermore the topic of the study may mislead the readers when the study seems to be limited to the hotel context and environment. The author should addresss more clearly, regarding the limitation of study and the degree of generalizability of the findings.
Answer: we have better explained the limitation of study and the degree of generalizability of the findings (line 420-424)
- The research discussions were quite limited and should be expanded with the relevant literature and empirical studies.
Answer: we have added new references to the literature on the subject (line 438-454)
- Conclusions were well-written but the author should conclude the main findings and explain how the research study achieve the objectives.
Answer: we have included the the main findings and explain how the research study achieve the objectives (line 517-535)
- In addition, the author should offer the practical guidelines for the stakeholders, including hotels and accomodations and other stakeholders.
Answer: we have included some practical guidelines for stakeholders, in particular for accommodation facilities owners (line 405-411 and Tab. 7)
Reviewer 2 Report
Journal: Sustainability (ISSN 2071-1050)
Manuscript ID: sustainability-1501542
Type: Article
Number of Pages: 16
Title: Tourism environmental impacts assessment to guide public authorities towards sustainable choices for the post-covid era
Dear Authors,
It has been for me a great honour, as well as a pleasantly challenging activity, to review the article entitled ”Tourism environmental impacts assessment to guide public authorities towards sustainable choices for the post-covid era.”
Overall, the article is interesting and easy to read. However, I suggest that the Authors introduce a few corrections (given below).
In my opinion, the Introduction chapter well introduces the potential reader to the subject of the article and is based on a well-chosen literature. However, the purpose of the article and its novelty could be better articulated.
Materials and Methods chapter - generally, this chapter has been written in a clear and understandable way.
Results
This chapter is written in a comprehensible way and is well-illustrated by 4 figures (title “Figure 4” is repeated two times; the last figure in this chapter should be “Figure 5”) and five tables (please check and correct the numbering of tables), which makes it much easier for potential readers to trace the presented research results.
Discussion
The discussion is conducted correctly. However, it would be worth to expand this chapter and refer more to similar research results published by other researchers. It would also be worth referring to the role of innovation in tourism in the context of competitiveness, which is currently of great interest to researchers related to the topic of tourism, for example:
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147929
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10110569
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126578
Conclusions
The conclusions are correct and relate to the obtained research results.
I don't feel competent to comment on linguistic correctness as English is not my mother tongue. I can only say that the text reads well and the article has a good chance of attracting potential readers. I wish the Authors good luck.
Author Response
Thank you for showing an interest in our article and for your helpful suggestions.
Here are the corrections point by point (also highlighted in the new uploaded text).
Introduction – we have better specified the purpose of the article and its novelty (line 156-161)
Results - we have corrected the numbers of figures and tables both in the text and in the captions
Discussion – we have included references to similar research results published by other researchers (line 438 - 454).
We have included a new paragraph concerning the role of innovation in tourism in the context of competitiveness citing texts proposed by the reviewer and other publications (line 461-474)
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear colleagues
Your article is scientifically absolutely sound and to my mind there are no points of objection. The only thing I would like to draw your attention is to check some misspellings such as
Line 28 Until the beginning of 2020, tourism has (had) experienced continued growth and it was …
Line 45 of the international demand due to global travel restrictions including many
Line 55 of 88 per cent as compared to the pre-pandemic level
Line 60 preferred unpopular and uncrowned (uncrowded ?)destinations
Line 112 while a globally emissions should be reduced
Line 208 the authors determinate determine a more realistic scope
Line 373 impactful activity is the sigh seeing sightseeing between
Page 11 Figure 4 jet sking skiing…. Sight seeing sightseeing
Line 429 Tanks Thanks to the LCA methodology
Best wishes
Author Response
Thank you for your suggestions and for taking the time to read our article. All highlighted errors have been corrected.
Line 28 - see line 28
Line 45 - see line 45
Line 55 - see line 55
Line 60 - see line 60
Line 112 - see line 112
Line 208- see line 213
Line 373 - see line 390
Page 11 Figure 4 - Page 11 Figure 5
Line 429 - see line 493
