Review Reports - Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research on Port Infrastructure Vulnerability to Climate Change (2012–2023): Key Indices, Influential Contributions, and Future Directions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript involves a very interesting topic, but there are some important shortcomings in the manuscript that need to be explained:

1——3.1. Continued growth in publications

1.1. The sentence “We focused solely on research articles, while conference papers, reviews, meetings, books, and other document types were discarded” in 3.1. Continued growth in publications, Why are conference papers, reviews, meetings, books, and other document types were discarded? It is very important to clearly explain the reasons and purposes behind this action. Because 913 articles were selected from 45 articles, the difference in number is huge.

1.2 - Figure 2 is very unclear at present and needs to be redrawn. For example, the expression of the vertical axis in figures 2Aand 2B should be the number of articles, and what does the blue mark in the lower right corner of figures 2Aand 2Brepresent? Figure 2C and 2D what does the vertical and horizontal axis label dim mean? According to the manuscript analysis, how can we see the changes from 2012 to 2023 in Figure 2C and figure 2D?

2——3.2.1. Influential countries

2.1- The sentence " The top 10 nations with the highest productivity were identified in Figure 3A. " in 3.2.1 influential countries. When figure 3a is first described, it should be placed after this analysis.

2.2- Figure 3 is also very unclear and needs to be redrawn. For example, the text in the figure is too small and unclear, so whether there should be a legend to make the reader understand it more clearly.

3——3.3. Detection methods to assess weather vulnerability in ports and 3.4. Overview of variables and tool

The contents of 3.3 and 3.4 need to be further integrated and sorted out. In other words, the contents of these two parts need to be further integrated and analyzed. As mentioned in the manuscript, these two parts are both about the vulnerability assessment methods of ports to cope with climate change, or about the impact of climate change on port vulnerability. The impact of climate change on port vulnerability is complex and dynamic, with port heterogeneity. The port climate vulnerability index is calculated by a certain mathematical model or method to quantitatively assess the degree of port climate vulnerability. Vulnerability index is essentially one of the methods to study the vulnerability of ports to climate change.

Comments on the Quality of English Language The language in this article is generally good and accurately conveys the author's research content and findings. However, the author's research content and findings are clearly communicated. However, the delivery of the speech is generally good, and there is still room for further improvement.

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

The following checklist were considered:

All references are relevant to the content of the manuscript;
All revisions/changes in the manuscript have been highlighted so that editors and reviewers can easily see them;
Below is the cover letter addressing the reviewers' comments and explaining, point by point, the details of the revisions/changes made to the manuscript;
The references suggested by the reviewers have been critically reviewed and included to improve the manuscript;
All comments from the review have been responded to;
The author's biography has been submitted for inclusion on the article's page.

Reviewer 1

We thank the valuable Reviewer#1 suggestions/comments and corrected the paper according to the improvements suggested. We appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive criticism you have provided. Your insights have contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our research. The answer to each comment is given below (in red). For a better understanding, the manuscript changes are also in red.

We have carefully considered your comments and suggestions and made revisions accordingly. Below, we address each of the points you raised.

Comments 1——3.1. Continued growth in publications

1.1. The sentence “We focused solely on research articles, while conference papers, reviews, meetings, books, and other document types were discarded” in 3.1. Continued growth in publications, Why are conference papers, reviews, meetings, books, and other document types were discarded? It is very important to clearly explain the reasons and purposes behind this action. Because 913 articles were selected from 45 articles, the difference in number is huge.

Articles from conferences, reviews, meetings, books, and other types of publications were not considered in this systematic review because we maintained our preference for research articles published in scientific journals, which undergo a rigorous peer-review process to ensure higher scientific quality and reliability. In contrast, conference papers and other types of publications may not have been subjected to the same level of scrutiny, often presenting preliminary or duplicated versions of works and compilations or interpretations of other research. (Part of this justification was added to paragraph 3.1 Continued growth in publications). A total of 45 articles were selected from an initial pool of 913, with the selection criteria detailed in paragraph 2.1, "Data source and search strategy," which precedes paragraph 3.1, "Continued growth in publications." Most of the articles were manually excluded based on the criteria described, as they focused exclusively on operational, logistical, economic, and financial factors in ports, which do not significantly contribute to the theme of this review and underscore the importance of this publication. For greater clarity, this information was added to paragraph 2.1 to enhance understanding and prevent repetitions or further questions throughout the text.

1.2 - Figure 2 is very unclear at present and needs to be redrawn. For example, the expression of the vertical axis in figures 2A and 2B should be the number of articles, and what does the blue mark in the lower right corner of figures 2Aand 2B represent? Figure 2C and 2D what does the vertical and horizontal axis label dim mean? According to the manuscript analysis, how can we see the changes from 2012 to 2023 in Figure 2C and figure 2D?

The vertical axis labels in Figures 2A and 2B refer to the number of articles and the blue watermark in the lower right corner of these figures is automatically generated by the open-source software Bibliometrix. In Figures 2C and 2D, the dark labels on the vertical and horizontal axes represent density and centrality, respectively. Changes from 2012 to 2023 are illustrated in Figures 2C and 2D through the evolution of cluster analysis.

Comments 1——3.2.1. Influential countries

2.1- The sentence "The top 10 nations with the highest productivity were identified in Figure 3A. " in 3.2.1 influential countries. When figure 3a is first described, it should be placed after this analysis.

As suggested, the figure was moved.

2.2. Figure 3 is also very unclear and needs to be redrawn. For example, the text in the figure is too small and unclear, so whether there should be a legend to make the reader understand it more clearly.

We want to clarify that the text size within the figure is generated automatically by the tool used, and it cannot be adjusted manually. This limitation arises from the tool's automatic formatting, which determines the size and positioning of the text based on the figure's layout.

Comments 1——3.3. Detection methods to assess weather vulnerability in ports and 3.4. Overview of variables and tool

The contents of 3.3 and 3.4 need to be further integrated and sorted out. In other words, the contents of these two parts need to be further integrated and analyzed. As mentioned in the manuscript, these two parts are both about the vulnerability assessment methods of ports to cope with climate change, or about the impact of climate change on port vulnerability. The impact of climate change on port vulnerability is complex and dynamic, with port heterogeneity. The port climate vulnerability index is calculated by a certain mathematical model or method to quantitatively assess the degree of port climate vulnerability. Vulnerability index is essentially one of the methods to study the vulnerability of ports to climate change.

The contents of sections 3.3 and 3.4 have been integrated and reclassified, as reflected in the revised text. This part of the manuscript discusses methods for assessing port vulnerability to climate change impacts and reviews how the analyzed literature addresses this topic, including the most frequently cited and discussed variables and methods. We believe that the published studies highlight the importance of this issue, not proposing a single approach to creating indices based on port location but rather emphasizing the specific approach of each port and its potential effects on global impacts.

Once again, we extend our sincerest appreciation for your time and effort in reviewing our work. Your expertise and insights have been invaluable, and we are grateful for the opportunity to benefit from your expertise.

We look forward to hearing your feedback on the revised manuscript and remain available to address any further questions or concerns you may have.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am grateful to the authors for their significant contribution to our understanding of crucial topics such as transport networks' resilience and physical infrastructures' vulnerability.

For this cardinality, I recommend broadening the arguments by introducing the concepts of vulnerability and risk in terms of risk assessment analysis and differentiating between prevention measures to reduce probability and protection measures to reduce magnitude, which can consist of reducing both vulnerability and exposure.

In this sense, the literature should also include a broad discussion on the integration of Decision Support Systems, both of the traditional type and the Web GIS and Spatial typos in general. For a broad examination from which to draw beyond you may consider https://iieta.org/journals/ijtdi/paper/10.18280/ijtdi.070106 which deals with the topic of risk management in emergency conditions in a broad sense. Moreover, in this regard, I would like to suggest reporting this work conducted by a CIle research group, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21664250.2020.1727402;

I hope it can open a further window for enriching the content of your work.

Therefore, in my opinion, if these issues around the use of support systems and the new trends in technology are explored in depth, the work will be considered of broader interest by the scientific community which is working a lot in this sector given the critical contexts and the extreme events that follow one another.

Figures need more space to be visualized by readres.

I really appreciated the supplementary file with the table, well done.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paerp it's linear in its form.

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

The following checklist has been considered:

All references are relevant to the content of the manuscript;
All revisions/changes in the manuscript have been highlighted so that editors and reviewers can easily see them;
Below is a cover letter addressing the reviewers' comments and explaining, point by point, the details of the revisions/changes made to the manuscript;
The references suggested by the reviewers have been critically reviewed and included to improve the manuscript;
All comments from the review have been responded to;
The author's biography has been submitted for inclusion on the article's page.

Reviewer 2

We thank the valuable Reviewer#2 suggestions/comments and corrected the paper according to the improvements suggested. We appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive criticism you have provided. Your insights have contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our research. The answer to each comment is given below (in blue). For a better understanding, the manuscript changes are also in blue.

We have carefully considered your comments and suggestions and made revisions accordingly. Below, we address each of the points you raised.

Comments 2——I am grateful to the authors for their significant contribution to our understanding of crucial topics such as transport networks' resilience and physical infrastructures' vulnerability.

I hope it can open a further window for enriching the content of your work.

Figures need more space to be visualized by readres.

I really appreciated the supplementary file with the table, well done.

As suggested, we have incorporated the concepts of vulnerability and risk into the port assessment analysis, highlighting their relevance in the introduction section. Per the suggested references, we also discussed the integration of Decision Support Systems (DSS), covering both traditional methods and modern tools such as Web GIS and other spatial solutions.

I want to clarify that the text size within the figure is generated automatically by the tool used, and it is not possible to adjust it manually. This limitation arises from the tool's automatic formatting, which determines the size and positioning of the text according to the figure's layout.

We look forward to hearing your feedback on the revised manuscript and remain available to address any further questions or concerns you may have.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends. The paper is interesting,easy to follow and clear. some comments can be found as follows:

1. The abstract can be improved by focusing on what is done in the paper and avoid general sentences.

2. There are some review papers about ports, so please clearly identify the advantage of this work over the previous works that have been published.

3. References can be improved.

4. It is not clear how many papers are considered in this study, is it 913 or less? Please clearly identify.

5. More details regarding the authors and countries can be added in 3.2.3.

6. 4. Discussion and 4.1. Future research directions and limitations can be limited to one title as well as there must be some discussion for the current situation and the future research directions.

This paper can be helpful https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114670

7. Conclusion must be improved.

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

The following checklist has been considered:

All references are relevant to the content of the manuscript;
All revisions/changes in the manuscript have been highlighted so that editors and reviewers can easily see them;
Below is a cover letter addressing the reviewers' comments and explaining, point by point, the details of the revisions/changes made to the manuscript;
The references suggested by the reviewers have been critically reviewed and included to improve the manuscript;
All comments from the review have been responded to;
The author's biography has been submitted for inclusion on the article's page.

Reviewer 3

We thank the valuable Reviewer#3 suggestions/comments and corrected the paper according to the improvements suggested. We appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive criticism you have provided. Your insights have contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our research. The answer to each comment is given below (in green). For a better understanding, the manuscript changes are also in green.

We have carefully considered your comments and suggestions and made revisions accordingly. Below, we address each of the points you raised.

Comments 3——The paper presents Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends. The paper is interesting,easy to follow and clear. some comments can be found as follows:

The abstract can be improved by focusing on what is done in the paper and avoid general sentences.

Thanks for your positive comments. The abstract was improved by focusing on what was done in the article and avoiding generic phrases.

There are some review papers about ports, so please clearly identify the advantage of this work over the previous works that have been published.

The importance of the work in relation to other publications was mentioned in the introduction section.

References can be improved.

The references were checked and improved. Thanks.

It is not clear how many papers are considered in this study, is it 913 or less? Please clearly identify.

In this study, 45 articles were selected after filtering 913 documents. A detailed explanation of this process can be found in section 2.1: "Data source and search strategy".

More details regarding the authors and countries can be added in 3.2.3.

As suggested, more details were provided in section 3.2.3. Influential authors. Additional information can also be found in Table S.1.

4. Discussion and 4.1. Future research directions and limitations can be limited to one title as well as there must be some discussion for the current situation and the future research directions.

This paper can be helpful https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114670

Section 4, "Discussion," was limited to a single title and, as suggested, an analysis of the current status and future research directions was included.

Conclusion must be improved.

The conclusion in section 5 has been improved.

We look forward to hearing your feedback on the revised manuscript and remain available to address any further questions or concerns you may have.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although the author has made further revisions to the article, in my opinion, The article has the following some shortcoming：

1. the article belongs to the bibliometric analysis type, although it analyzes the most influential countries, journals and authors, port climate vulnerability assessment variables and tools, and discusses the future research directions. However, compared with the relevant bibliometric literature, this article lacks a good explanation of the vulnerability of ports to climate change. For example, the title of the article is "bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends”， However, it is mentioned in the Abstract that "the research highlights the increase in publications focusing on the vulnerability of port infrastructure to climate impacts”， The text has repeatedly mentioned the analysis of port infrastructure vulnerability and port response to climate change. As a bibliometric analysis, the theme of the article is not clear enough. What is the vulnerability of ports to climate change? What are the elements of port infrastructure? The impact of climate change on ports is complex and multifaceted. How does climate affect port infrastructure? How does port infrastructure respond to climate change or what is the impact mechanism that affects the climate resilience of port infrastructure? At present, the article has not made a clear definition and analysis of the research topic, research object and research scope.

2. the relevant pictures in the article are very unclear. Compared with the general bibliometric analysis articles, the readability and aesthetics of the pictures drawn in the article are insufficient, which reflects the author's scientific research attitude and scientific research level to a certain extent.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The tense of English needs to be checked

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

Reviewer 1

We are grateful for the valuable suggestions/comments from Reviewer#1, during round 2. We corrected the manuscript according to the suggested improvements. We appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive criticism you have provided. Your insights have contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our research. The answer to each comment is given below (in red). The manuscript changes are also in red and bold for a better understanding.

We have carefully considered your comments and suggestions and made revisions accordingly. Below, we address each of the points you raised.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although the author has made further revisions to the article, in my opinion, The article has the following some shortcoming:

Comments 1 —— The article belongs to the bibliometric analysis type, although it analyzes the most influential countries, journals and authors, port climate vulnerability assessment variables and tools, and discusses the future research directions. However, compared with the relevant bibliometric literature, this article lacks a good explanation of the vulnerability of ports to climate change. For example, the title of the article is "bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends”. However, it is mentioned in the Abstract that "the research highlights the increase in publications focusing on the vulnerability of port infrastructure to climate impacts”. The text has repeatedly mentioned the analysis of port infrastructure vulnerability and port response to climate change. As a bibliometric analysis, the theme of the article is not clear enough. 1. What is the vulnerability of ports to climate change? 2. What are the elements of port infrastructure? The impact of climate change on ports is complex and multifaceted. 3. How does climate affect port infrastructure? 4. How does port infrastructure respond to climate change or what is the impact mechanism that affects the climate resilience of port infrastructure? At present, the article has not made a clear definition and analysis of the research topic, research object and research scope.

Response 1: We appreciate your comments and understand the need to clarify the focus of the manuscript. We recognize that the previous title may have confused about the study's main objective. To better reflect the content and analyses, we have revised both the title and several sections of the manuscript. These changes emphasize the analysis of port infrastructure vulnerability to climate change and align the theme more closely with the bibliometric methodology used. Thank you for your detailed feedback. We would like to inform you that this comment was addressed in the Introduction section, while comments 2, 3, and 4 were covered in Section 3.3, "Overview of Variables and Tools for Assessing Climate Vulnerability in Ports."

Comments 2 —— The relevant pictures in the article are very unclear. Compared with the general bibliometric analysis articles, the readability and aesthetics of the pictures drawn in the article are insufficient, reflecting the author's scientific research attitude and level to a certain extent.

Response 2: In response to your observation, we have given special attention to improving the clarity, quality and presentation of the figures, making them more legible and visually appropriate. We believe that the changes made have significantly enhanced the understanding of the data presented and reinforced the scientific rigour of the work. Additionally, per the editor's suggestion, figures 2 and 3 have been reorganized into a 4x1 panel instead of the original 2x2 format to optimize the visualization and comparison of the information.

*Comments on the Quality of English Language: The tense of English needs to be checked

Regarding your observation about the use of verb tense in the article, it has been carefully checked and revised to ensure it is appropriate and consistent throughout the text.

We look forward to hearing your feedback on the revised manuscript and remain available to address any further questions or concerns you may have.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank so much for the intense work of revision.

I have nothing more to underline.

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

Thank so much for the intense work of revision. I have nothing more to underline.

Reviewer 2

We express our sincere gratitude for your detailed evaluation and valuable suggestions for our article during round 1. Your comments were instrumental in improving the quality of the work, providing new perspectives that enriched the discussion and presentation of the results. We have implemented your recommendations to strengthen the scientific rigor and clarity of the article, and we believe that the contributions made will positive in the final version.

Once again, we thank you for your time and dedication in reviewing our manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. the picture and the title are not displayed on the same page, as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. It is recommended to adjust and modify.

2.What do the different colors of the circles in Figure 3D mean? What does the size of the circle mean? In addition, it is not found in 3.2.3 Influential authors any specific contributions from authors related to the climate resilience of port infrastructure, such as who made outstanding research contributions in this aspect and what research conclusions were proposed. This section describes the analysis in general and does not go into depth.

3. Table 1 needs to be adjusted.

4. The title of the paper is "bliometric analysis of global research on port infrastructure vulnerability to climate change (2012-2023): key indications, influential contributions, and future directions ”. However, the discussion and conclusion of the paper are not focused on the key research object of port infrastructure, and carry out in-depth discussion and analysis. This section discusses climate change and port vulnerability in general. The technical upgrading and digital and intelligent management of port infrastructure, the optimization of port infrastructure management organization, port operation, port climate resilience, port infrastructure management, maintenance, investment and other aspects were not mentioned, which does not reflect the value of the review article。

Author Response

Response Letter: Bibliometric analysis of articles on port vulnerability to climate change on a global scale from (2012 to 2023): indices, evolution and research trends

Reviewer 1

We are grateful for the valuable suggestions/comments from Reviewer#1, during round 3. We corrected the article according to the suggested improvements. We appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive criticism you have provided. Your insights have contributed significantly to improving the quality and clarity of our research. The answer to each comment is given below (in red). For a better understanding, the manuscript changes are also in red.

We have carefully considered your comments and suggestions and made revisions accordingly. Below, we address each of the points you raised.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments 1 —— The picture and the title are not displayed on the same page, as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. It is recommended to adjust and modify.

Response 1: The document layouts have been revised to ensure that the titles of Figures 2 and 3 are displayed on the same page.

Comments 2 —— What do the different colors of the circles in Figure 3D mean? What does the size of the circle mean? In addition, it is not found in 3.2.3 Influential authors any specific contributions from authors related to the climate resilience of port infrastructure, such as who made outstanding research contributions in this aspect and what research conclusions were proposed. This section describes the analysis in general and does not go into depth.

Response 2: In Figure 3D, the colors of the circles in section 3.2 represent different groups of researchers and collaborations, based on criteria such as geographic regions and co-authorship networks. The circles' size reflects the authors' relevance and influence within the research network, with larger circles corresponding to more frequently cited or highly collaborative authors. Additionally, section 3.2.3 highlights influential authors, especially those who contributed to the study of climate resilience in port infrastructure. Authors such as [11] and [20] are mentioned for their significant contributions regarding the challenges of climate change, such as sea level rise, and for emphasizing robust adaptation strategies tailored to local specificities and international practices.

[11] Becker, A., Newell, D., Fischer, M., & Schwegler, B. (2011). Will ports become forts? Climate change impacts, opportunities and challenges. Terra et Aqua, 122, 11-17. [20] Hanson, S. E., & Nicholls, R. J. (2020). Demand for ports to 2050: Climate policy, growing trade and the impacts of sea‐level rise. Earth's Future, 8(8), e2020EF001543.

Comments 3 —— Table 1 needs to be adjusted.

Response 3: Thank you for your observation regarding Table 1. The necessary adjustments have been made to ensure it is properly formatted.

Comments 4 —— The title of the paper is "bliometric analysis of global research on port infrastructure vulnerability to climate change (2012-2023): key indications, influential contributions, and future directions”. However, the discussion and conclusion of the paper are not focused on the key research object of port infrastructure, and carry out in-depth discussion and analysis. This section discusses climate change and port vulnerability in general. The technical upgrading and digital and intelligent management of port infrastructure, the optimization of port infrastructure management organization, port operation, port climate resilience, port infrastructure management, maintenance, investment and other aspects were not mentioned, which does not reflect the value of the review article.

Response 4: In response to your comments, we have improved the discussion and conclusion sections, specifically addressing the suggested topics related to port infrastructure and resilience.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf