Investigating Regenerative Ideation within Sustainable Development Goals
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper concerns a very significant research problem because it is much more advanced idea in comparison to sustainability. It's a forward step in the entire idea of sustainable development.
There are shown practical implications of regenerative ideation within sustainable development. The Authors introduced a new bridge between terms, I guess.
The main research method is comparative analysis of two case studies. It's lack of own original research concerning the problem. I suggest to conduct such analysis on the base of the literature review made in the paper; Please, try to disseminate and identify the results with other regions in the world - will the conclusions the same?
The hypotheses, research design and questions are not clearly stated - must be improved.
Author Response
Dear respected reviewer,
Authors appreciate your valid comments and recommendations, and we are very keen to respond to all mentioned concerns as explained below:
- The paper concerns a very significant research problem because it is much more advanced idea in comparison to sustainability. It's a forward step in the entire idea of sustainable development.
Response: No action is required.
- There are shown practical implications of regenerative ideation within sustainable development. The Authors introduced a new bridge between terms, I guess.
Response: No action is required.
- The main research method is comparative analysis of two case studies. It's lack of own original research concerning the problem. I suggest to conduct such analysis on the base of the literature review made in the paper; Please, try to disseminate and identify the results with other regions in the world - will the conclusions the same?
Response: The authors believe that the comparative analysis was not the selected method for the research’s objective because the two selected cases are different in urban scale and the research did not aim to articulate the differences or similarities between the two cases.
The research aims to explore how the proposed regenerative development goals have been applied within the built environment, where the selected case study method enabled the researchers to investigate the selected communities in-depth.
The research provides deep analysis for each case separately based on the literature review and combined the two case analysis results in one table for better evaluation confining all used methods and techniques.
The authors used the comparative analysis for comparing the proposed regenerative and design goals with the current SDGs. Where that was added to the research methods (lines 64, 68)
The authors disseminate the results to other regions worldwide because the RDGs can be tracked already within any built environment regardless of its context, region, or scale. The differences are expected to appear in the adopted solutions and design techniques. Where that was added result in lines (501, 502, 526, and 527).
- The hypotheses, research design and questions are not clearly stated - must be improved.
Response: Improvements already considered in the modified research paper.
All the cited references are relevant to the research;
Response: The references were categorized according to the topics that have been explored by the article;
Literature related to sustainability: references (2,3,6,8)
Literature related to regenerative development and design: references (1,4,5,7,9-28)
Case study 1: references (29-40)
Case study 1: references (41-48)
Reviewer 2 Report
Interesting and well-written paper. To me, the most exciting part is the suggestion of creating a metric related to regeneration. This would allow for more comparisons and contrasts and add to the sustainability literature. I hope that the authors, or someone, follows through with this idea.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Many thanks for the great efforts and fruitful response.
No action is required.
Reviewer 3 Report
This work is interesting, which is a significant advancement over existing knowledge, but it needs substantial improvements before considering for publication as mentioned below in comments to the authors.
--- It’s good for Abstract contain some quantitative information. In addition, abstract should be more precise, so authors should delete the interrogative sentence.
---The sentence in line 21~22: "The study recommends…" is not clear and need to be re-written.
--- Authors should be changed Figure 4 clearer.
---[37] Do not appear in the title of the figure on Line 226.
--- Is there any reason for selecting Case 1:SEKEM and Case 2:Dubai. Please confirm if “SEKEM” is correct? Is it lowercase.
--- The authors should include the novelty of the work. Then, how the presented work is better than the previously published similar work in the terms of cost, reliability and performance.
--- How can your results be used for practical application? Authors can describe more in the conclusion.
--- The authors need to explain more what is the ultimate objective with this manuscript?
--- The form of references chapter should be united. You must check them carefully.
Author Response
Dear respected reviewer,
Authors appreciate your valid comments and recommendations, and we are very keen to respond to all mentioned concerns as explained below:
- It’s good for Abstract contain some quantitative information. In addition, abstract should be more precise, so authors should delete the interrogative sentence.
Response: Improvements already considered in the modified research paper.
- The sentence in line 21~22: "The study recommends…" is not clear and need to be re-written.
Response: Improvements already considered in the modified research paper.
- Authors should be changed Figure 4 clearer.
Response: Improvements already considered in the modified research paper.
- [37] Do not appear in the title of the figure on Line 226.
Response: It is not clear whether the reviewer recommends removing the reference or keeping it.
- Is there any reason for selecting Case 1:SEKEM and Case 2:Dubai. Please confirm if “SEKEM” is correct? Is it lowercase.
Response: The word SEKEM is correctly written as mentioned in references.
Response: The study selected SEKEM village in Egypt and Dubai as sustainable cities for these reasons, as mentioned in the article (lines 72-79):
SEKEM village is regarded as a unique Egyptian model for sustainable development with international recognition, as shown by getting the Alternative Nobel Prize in 2003 and the Business for Peace Award in 2012.
Dubai Sustainable City has shown many of the sustainability strategies that have been significantly implemented.
SEKEM represents the neighborhood scale compared with the Dubai case, which represents the city scale, to stand on various strategies and techniques for applying regenerative development.
- The authors should include the novelty of the work. Then, how the presented work is better than the previously published similar work in the terms of cost, reliability and performance.
Response: To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no study was found that developed regenerative development goals within the UN’s SDGs. Therefore, the significance of the current study lies in bridging this knowledge gap by deeply understanding regeneration ideation within the built environment, its motivations, definitions, and principles.
- How can your results be used for practical application? Authors can describe more in the conclusion.
Improvements already considered in the modified research paper.
- The authors need to explain more what is the ultimate objective with this manuscript?
The current study is aimed at setting regenerative development goals (RDGs) to tackle the shortcomings of traditional sustainability, aligning with the UN's SDGs.
- The form of references chapter should be united. You must check them carefully
All references were checked to be united format
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Accept in present form.
Reviewer 3 Report
It can be accepted according to my final review currently.
