The Greener the Hotel, the Better Operating Efficiency It Has? A Sustainable Tourism Perspective

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity of reading and reviewing your interesting manuscript. The paper addresses a topic which is important, actual and under the scope of the Sustainability journal. 

The title is relevant and appropriate for the content of the article.

The Introduction includes references to the topic investigated but there is neither clear identification of the research gap, nore mentions to how this paper will contribute to the advancement of knowledge on the topic. You should also present the aims and objectives of the paper.

The Literature section is short and general. You should discuss previous literature investigating the topic under your reserach, not general issues.

The Methodology section is adequate and well designed. The Findings and Discussion section are also appropriate and includes a clear presentation of the results.

The final section is general, does not reflect the implications of your findings. Moreover you should present how your findings do relate with previous literature results, which are the limitations (which are obvious given the sample!), further directions for invetsigation, theoretical and practical implications.

Moreover, the writing and language should be improved.

Good luck!

The English should be improved.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 1)

 

25 June 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Our responses to each suggestion and comment are as follows, and they are presented in blue texts with a grey background color in the revised manuscript.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for the opportunity of reading and reviewing your interesting manuscript. The paper addresses a topic which is important, actual and under the scope of the Sustainability journal. 

The title is relevant and appropriate for the content of the article.

The Introduction includes references to the topic investigated but there is neither clear identification of the research gap, nore mentions to how this paper will contribute to the advancement of knowledge on the topic. You should also present the aims and objectives of the paper.

The Literature section is short and general. You should discuss previous literature investigating the topic under your reserach, not general issues.

The Methodology section is adequate and well designed. The Findings and Discussion section are also appropriate and includes a clear presentation of the results.

The final section is general, does not reflect the implications of your findings. Moreover you should present how your findings do relate with previous literature results, which are the limitations (which are obvious given the sample!), further directions for invetsigation, theoretical and practical implications.

Moreover, the writing and language should be improved.

Good luck!

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion. The modifications are as follows:

Line92-99

This study used Network Data Envelopment Analysis, which can avoid human subjective interference. It  can also handle multiple output and input items simultaneously without preset weights, which elicits the objectivity and validity of the results. On the other hand, the green hotels business model with better operating efficiency can serve as a reference for green hotels with weak business performance. This model can enable green hotel managers to determine the direction for operating efficiency improvement and resource allocation strategies. Therefore, the present study contributes to the advancement of knowledge on this topic.

 

Line149-171

2.2. Operating efficiency

The quality of a company’s operating conditions is typically directly affected its profitability. Maintaining a good operating condition continually affects investors' willingness to invest in a company. Whether investors can obtain the maximum benefits also depends on an understanding of the company’s operating performance. [21] highlighted that operating efficiency is the ability of a company to reduce operating costs in attaining its objective through a combination of the right people, processes, and technology. With the right combination of resources, the business operation of any company can enhance the productivity of the services or goods offered. Previous literature shows that, in the early evaluation of hotel operating efficiency, financial ratios were often the data used as the basis of evaluation [22-23]. However, when using this method to evaluate operating efficiency within the hotel industry, it is challenging to fully measure the advantages and disadvantages of actual operating efficiency. This is because the single or partial indicators used are not comprehensive enough. Therefore, considering the input and output items of hotels to obtain a more comprehensive evaluation method became the focus of analysis [24-26] examined values affecting hotel operations, including the number of employees, the number of rooms, catering expenses, and other expenses as input items and the total hotel revenue as the output item to calculate the multiple efficiency indicators for 48 local hotels. Their results indicate that the overall average efficiency was low. The above literature illustrates that using inputs and outputs to evaluate hotel operating efficiency can yield more comprehensive analytical results. However, there are different opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of hotel operating efficiency regarding the investment of resources in environmental protection and energy conservation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Line480-493

The findings of this study indicate that it is not sufficient to measure their actual operating efficiency if green hotels only use financial ratios as the data basis of evaluation. Considering input-output-related factors through DEA, a more comprehensive analysis of the operating efficiency of green hotels in the European Union can be obtained. This finding echoes the focus of current research on hotel operating efficiency.

Regarding future research directions, this study used green hotels in the European Union as the research objects. With the global rise of green issues and environmental awareness, hotels worldwide have invested in green hotel certification and related software and hardware construction. The future of green hotels in different regions can handle multiple output and input items through the network data development analysis adopted in this study. This can be used to further compare the operating efficiency of green hotels in different regions, such as whether the education level of green hotel managers varies due to cultural differences in Europe and Asia, which needs to be further explored.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting research paper. It is well structured and presented, clear and valuable for academics and practitioners. My concern is the clarity of the methodology for the reader. Initially, DMU is given only as an acronym. There should be explicit that refers to decision-making units, since a reader may not be familiar with DEA. Futhermore, data used should should be better described (the numbers) before the output of the analysis. Finally, the less obvious findings should be better triggered throught the paper (abstract, findings, discusion, conclusions and implications). Well done anyway!

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 1)

 

25 June 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Our responses to each suggestion and comment are as follows, and they are presented in blue texts with a grey background color in the revised manuscript.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a very interesting research paper. It is well structured and presented, clear and valuable for academics and practitioners. My concern is the clarity of the methodology for the reader. Initially, DMU is given only as an acronym. There should be explicit that refers to decision-making units, since a reader may not be familiar with DEA. Futhermore, data used should should be better described (the numbers) before the output of the analysis. Finally, the less obvious findings should be better triggered throught the paper (abstract, findings, discusion, conclusions and implications). Well done anyway!

 

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion. The modifications are as follows:

Line307-311

The Decision Making Unit (DMU) is the decision-making unit in the input-output analysis. The DMU typically represents a green hotel for evaluating efficiency and performance in the present study. Each DMU has its own input and output items. These can be analyzed and evaluated through methods such as network data envelopment analysis.

 

Line325

Table 3. Narrative Statistics Table of the Input-Output Variables for Green Hotels in the European Union in 2022

Variable		Average	Maximum value	Minimum value	Standard deviation
Environmental protection and green energy input item	Tree Planting and Green Area	30,126 Ping	51,668 Ping	16,587 Ping	865
	Environmental protection equipment	1.26 Million euros	2.12 Million euros	0.52 Million euros	0.046
	Solar photovoltaic input cost	0.86 Million euros	1.62 Million euros	0.28 Million euros	0.018
Intermediate output	Energy saving	0.68 Million euros	0.97 Million euros	0.38 Million euros	0.011
	Reduce the amount of plastic waste	12,366 Kilograms	18,650 Kilograms	8,856 Kilograms	869
	Reduce carbon emissions	28,669 Kilograms	48,552 Kilograms	12,338 Kilograms	1026
The second stage input item	Number of employees	98 People	185 People	36 People	5.68
	Operating expenses	4.368 Million euros	6.885 Million euros	2.581 Million euros	0.054
	Number of rooms	62	86	42	3.82
Interdepartmental Link	Operating income	12.82 Million euros	18.61 Million euros	8.98 Million euros	0.468
Final output	EPS	0.67 euros	0.96 euros	0.35 euros	0.015
Inter-period carry over	Profit	7.82 Million euros	10.36 Million euros	4.68 Million euros	2.16

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In general, this paper is researched with quite interesting arguments. However, due to some shortages found during this review. This paper is not yet ready for final acceptance.

1.    You have a section 2.1 Green hotel and operating efficiency (in which implies that there will be a following section) but where is 2.2?

2.    Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 do not make any sense at all. These parts read like unfinished business. If you compare these two sections with 2.1.3, you will realise what I indicated.

3.    In 1. Introduction, you claimed the paper “aims to investigation green hotels in the EU”, but why? You need to provide sufficient justifications on your selection.

4.    P.4, “EU Green Hotel has three departments”, why three? Not four or five? Your reasoning behind this?

5.    What is “DMU” stands for? You need to provide full name for all abbreviations adopted in the paper while you mention it for the first time.

6. Consistency of overall presentation is so important for a good paper, e.g. European Union, EU; Covid-19, COVID-19; green hotel, Green Hotel.

It is fine in general.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 1)

 

25 June 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Our responses to each suggestion and comment are as follows, and they are presented in blue texts with a grey background color in the revised manuscript.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In general, this paper is researched with quite interesting arguments. However, due to some shortages found during this review. This paper is not yet ready for final acceptance.

1. You have a section 2.1 Green hotel and operating efficiency(in which implies that there will be a following section) but where is 2.2?
2. Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 do not make any sense at all. These parts read like unfinished business. If you compare these two sections with 2.1.3, you will realise what I indicated.
3. In 1. Introduction, you claimed the paper “aims to investigation green hotels in the EU”, but why? You need to provide sufficient justifications on your selection.
4. P.4, “EU Green Hotel has three departments”, why three? Not four or five? Your reasoning behind this?
5. What is “DMU” stands for? You need to provide full name for all abbreviations adopted in the paper while you mention it for the first time.
6. Consistency of overall presentation is so important for a good paper, e.g. European Union, EU; Covid-19, COVID-19; green hotel, Green Hotel.

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion. The modifications are as follows:

1.

Line149-171

2.2. Operating efficiency

The quality of a company’s operating conditions is typically directly affected its profitability. Maintaining a good operating condition continually affects investors' willingness to invest in a company. Whether investors can obtain the maximum benefits also depends on an understanding of the company’s operating performance. Shawk (2008) highlighted that operating efficiency is the ability of a company to reduce operating costs in attaining its objective through a combination of the right people, processes, and technology. With the right combination of resources, the business operation of any company can enhance the productivity of the services or goods offered. Previous literature shows that, in the early evaluation of hotel operating efficiency, financial ratios were often the data used as the basis of evaluation (Baker & Riley, 1994; Wassenaar & Stafford, 1991). However, when using this method to evaluate operating efficiency within the hotel industry, it is challenging to fully measure the advantages and disadvantages of actual operating efficiency. This is because the single or partial indicators used are not comprehensive enough. Therefore, considering the input and output items of hotels to obtain a more comprehensive evaluation method became the focus of analysis (Higuerey, Viñan-Merecí, Malo-Montoya., & Martínez-Fernández, 2020; Poldrugovac, Tekavcic, & Jankovic. (2016). For example, Anderson and Scott (2000) examined values affecting hotel operations, including the number of employees, the number of rooms, catering expenses, and other expenses as input items and the total hotel revenue as the output item to calculate the multiple efficiency indicators for 48 local hotels. Their results indicate that the overall average efficiency was low. The above literature illustrates that using inputs and outputs to evaluate hotel operating efficiency can yield more comprehensive analytical results. However, there are different opinions on the advantages and disadvantages of hotel operating efficiency regarding the investment of resources in environmental protection and energy conservation.

 

2.

The 12 indicators across three dimensions of sustainable hotels listed in this study refer to the standards established by the World Travel & Tourism Council (2022). Among many institutions and organizations that develop green hotel standards, the World Travel &Tourism Council's planning may need to be improved. However, it is considered one of the guidelines that can be referred to.

 

3.

Due to the database's limited data, only data on eco-friendly hotels in the European Union is currently available. Therefore, this study used eco-friendly hotels in the European Union as the pilot study. When the data becomes more complete, an operating efficiency analysis of eco-friendly hotels in other regions will be conducted, and the additional research results will be compared.

 

4.

This study primarily analyzed the impact of green environmental protection on hotel operating efficiency. Most green hotels in the European Union region with green certifications typically have only three departments: (1) an environmental protection department; (2) a catering department; (3) a housekeeping department. Only a small number of green hotels have an additional souvenir department. According to the MDEA empirical data requirements, green hotel information must be consistent across the departments. Therefore, this study adopted the research model of three departments.

 

5.

DMU stands for Decision Making Unit; in the present study, DMU represents a green hotel that was evaluated for operating efficiency.

 

6.

The full text has been revised for consistency.

Line59-68

This study used Dynamic Network Data Envelopment Analysis (DNDEA) for empirical analysis. The research objective was to analyze the production and market efficiency of the 20 most popular green hotels in the European Union. Further, we measured the overall operating efficiency of green hotels using the cross-annual operating profit developed using a two-stage dynamic model. The operating efficiency generated by green production in the first stage was used as an element in the market efficiency analysis of green hotels in the second stage. Finally, we conducted a regression analysis based on the operating efficiency results to explore the impact of green equipment investment, manager education level, and the green certification level on the operating efficiency of green hotels.

 

Lin147-149

The literature illustrates the advantages elicited by promoting green energy and hotel operations.

2.2. Operating efficiency

 

Line212-217

Green hotels in the European Union region with green certification typically have only three departments: (1) an environmental protection department; (2) a catering department; (3) a housekeeping department. This study used a database with three departments [33]. Only a small number of green hotels have an additional souvenir department. According to the MDEA empirical data requirements, green hotel information must be consistent across the departments.

 

 

 

 

Line327-337

The above table 3 shows that in 2022, the Tree Planting and Green Area of the green hotels in the European Union invested the most in DMU6, with 16587 Ping, while the minimum was DMU11, with 16587 Ping. Regarding the environmental protection equipment variable, the maximum investment was DMU3, with 2.12 million euros. The minimum was DMU9, with only 0.52 million euros. Regarding the solar photovoltaic input cost investment variable, the maximum was DMU17, which is 1.62 million euros, and the minimum was DMU15, which is 0.28 million euros. Among the profit output variables of green hotels, the highest was DMU9, with 10.36 million euros. The minimum was DMU16, with 4.68 million euros. According to the statistical data presented in this study, investing more in green energy equipment elements may not necessarily produce a higher profit for a green hotel.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The manuscript entitled "The greener the hotel, the better operating efficiency it is? A sustainable tourism perspective” analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels during the epidemic, and to explore whether hotels that pay more attention to green and energy-saving would be more economically efficient. The object of the study is the top 20 green hotels voted on the EU Internet from 2018 to 2022. The manuscript is well organized and the results are satisfactory. After some minor corrections, the manuscript can be accepted to be published.

In this paper, the methodology is well written, but discussion need to be improved. Results presented need a better discussion. There was no enough discussion or analysis of the results. The author should explain and clearly discuss this part based on scientific knowledge. It is better to compare the results with more similar recent works and discuss the superiority of the work.

Abstract: abstract should state briefly the purpose of the study undertaken, brief mention of experimental aspects (without using abbreviations), highlights of the results and important conclusions based on the obtained results. Therefore, it is suggested that the Abstract should be improved with more data.

Keywords→ arrange in alphabetical order.

The novelty of the work should be emphasized in the introduction section.

Procedures in Research Methodology section must be suitable reference if possible

 

 

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 1)

 

25 June 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Our responses to each suggestion and comment are as follows, and they are presented in blue texts with a grey background color in the revised manuscript.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Abstract: abstract should state briefly the purpose of the study undertaken, brief mention of experimental aspects (without using abbreviations), highlights of the results and important conclusions based on the obtained results. Therefore, it is suggested that the Abstract should be improved with more data.

Keywords→ arrange in alphabetical order.

The novelty of the work should be emphasized in the introduction section.

Procedures in Research Methodology section must be suitable reference if possible

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion. The modifications are as follows:

 

Line29

Keywords: COVID-19; Green hotel; Operating efficiency; Sustainable tourism

 

 

Line92-99

This study used Network Data Envelopment Analysis, which can avoid human subjective interference. It  can also handle multiple output and input items simultaneously without preset weights, which elicits the objectivity and validity of the results. On the other hand, the green hotels business model with better operating efficiency can serve as a reference for green hotels with weak business performance. This model can enable green hotel managers to determine the direction for operating efficiency improvement and resource allocation strategies. Therefore, the present study contributes to the advancement of knowledge on this topic.

 

Liao Guohua. A study on the operating efficiency of tourist hotels in scenic areas. National Taichung University of Science and Technology Business Administration,Master's thesis, Master of Science, Taichung City. 2021.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for providing the revised version of your manuscript. My comments and suggestions were addressed.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 2)

 

2 July 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Thank you for providing the revised version of your manuscript. My comments and suggestions were addressed.

 

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1.P.1, line 11, "Abstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels dAbstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels during the epidemic," This should be fixed.

2. The authors need to be more careful about what you have written.

1.P.1, line 11, "Abstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels dAbstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels during the epidemic," This should be fixed.

2. The authors need to be more careful about what you have written.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Suggestions for Author (Round 2)

 

2 July 2023

 

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the constructive suggestions and comments on our manuscript(ID:sustainability-2454962). The suggestions and comments are helpful for improving the manuscript. We are submitting the revised version of the manuscript with our responses to the suggestions and comments by the reviewer. Many thanks for your guidance.

 

Our responses to each suggestion and comment are as follows, and they are presented in blue texts with a grey background color in the revised manuscript.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.P.1, line 11, "Abstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels dAbstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels during the epidemic," This should be fixed.

2. The authors need to be more careful about what you have written.

 

Response:

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestion. The modifications are as follows:

 

Line 11-13

Abstract: This study mainly to analyze the operating efficiency of green hotels during the epidemic, and to explore whether hotels that pay more attention to green and energy-saving would be more economically efficient.

 

Thank you for the reminder. We will pay more attention to the details of writing in our next submission.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf