The Potential for Healthy, Sustainable, and Equitable Transport Systems in Africa and the Caribbean: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Meta-Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In the present study, the authors have investigated the potential for healthy, sustainable, and equitable transport systems in Africa and the Caribbean by a mixed-methods systematic review and meta-study. The question posed by the authors is new; the methods and results are relevant and accurate. The conclusion drawn by the author through the investigation has better social significance. Therefore, I think that this manuscript is worth publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1, 

Thank you very much for your time and critical assessment of our manuscript. 

Please see the attachment in response to your comments. 

With best regards, 
Anna Brugulat-Panés

Reviewer 2 Report

Very nice article about a very important but frequently "forgotten" topic (which by the way is also relevant for Europe, albeit on a less severe level).

A general comment from my side is that it is a pity that no more efforts have been made to suggest meaures more clearly - however, I know that this is a difficult task given the complexity of things andf preconditions that need to be changed ...

I have two minor remarks: 1) The mobility paradigm is referred to, but then in the text no reference literature is cited (for instance Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and planning A, 38(2), 207-226.).

And 2) The Human Mobility Transition model is mentioned in the first line of the abstract, but then is not mentioned any more, neither in the abstract not in the article text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2, 

Thank you very much for your time and your critical assessment of our manuscript. 

Please see the attachment in response to your comments. 

With best regards, 
The authors

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript resembles a great effort towards the understanding of the aspirational stage of the Human Mobility Transition in Africa and the Caribbean. Through an exhaustive and thorough systematic review, the authors did manage to reveal meaningful insights, highlighting challenges and opportunities. It is a well-structured and well-delivered paper that can contribute greatly to the academic and research debate on equity and sustainable transport. Furthermore, all the figures and tables are clear, thus enhancing the attractiveness of the paper. Admirable work!

However, I have a few minor comments that may be useful.

First, it would be meaningful to write a few more words about the existing situation in Africa and Caribbean. This will guide the readers towards a better understanding on the insufficiencies of these two areas.

Second, the material and methods section is cohesive and well-written. Nonetheless, a small diagram depicting the methodological flow would be useful. Also, why did the authors select these specific methods. Maybe add a justification. Moreover, is there any specific reason for choosing 2008. The authors shall elaborate further. In the same context, I have one more question. Why did the authors avoid assessing quality of the grey literature. They do have a point, but it should be justified. In terms of readability, in table 2, the authors use bold only in the words opportunity and challenge, otherwise it is confusing. Furthermore, which is the threshold in qualifying the chosen studies into the second round of analysis?

Third, in the results section, I would suggest to increase the size of the font in the legends found in Figure 2. Also, maybe a legend signifying the size of the circles in figure would matter.

Finally, regarding the discussion section. It is a well-articulated section. However, some titles could be helpful. For instance, limitations, further research, contribution.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3, 

Thank you very much for your time and your critical assessment of our manuscript. 

Please see the attachment in response to your comments. 

With best regards, 
The authors

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

First let me congratulate for your work. It is an important topic to be discussed and also the methodology used is appropriate. However, I have some minor comments and suggestions for your work. 

1- Research questions and hypothesis are not clear, please clarify!

2- In the introduction part, you need to add a last paragraph that explains the flow of your remaining work.

3- Conclusion session is limited and not developed, please add more related information.

4- The subsessions of "3.2.1. Meta-data" are not clear in numbering, please check and list accordingly.

5- Finally, please check your paper for some minor typos error.

Good luck!

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 4, 

Thank you very much for your time and your critical assessment of our manuscript. 

Please see the attachment in response to your comments. 

With best regards, 
The authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf