Sustainable Development of the Infrastructure of the City of Astana Since the Establishment of the Capital as a Factor of Tourism Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

The manuscript is focused on the assessment of the infrastructure of the city of Astana (Kazakhstan) as an important factor of tourism development. Moreover, the authors identified the obstacles limiting infrastructure progress and proposed strategic directions for its enhancement.

After a careful examination of the work, I compare the manuscript to a travel guide or a journalist's approach because in the methodology and results sections the presentation has a rather vague content and the authors describe partial results.

Introduction:

Introduction should be revised. The introduction section should provide a theoretical overview of the topic covered in a synthetic way, emphasizing the importance of the topic and main ideas. After presenting a synthetic theoretical background (maximum one page or one page adf half), the purpose of the paper should be stated, including a brief justification of the importance of the study. Here it can be included the sentence about the situation of Kazakhstan (rows 57-59). After presenting the purpose of the manuscript, the authors should formulate the research questions.

I recommend you to include Literature Review as second section.

Literature Review is missing (although it was briefly summarizedin Introduction). I mean, it would be enriching to find a section were you offer a slight review on the main literature on the issue you are studying.

 

Territory and area of study

This section should be renamed: Case study description

More details of the territorial and political-administrative evolution can be summarized here instead of being presented in the Results section which is too loaded with historical details and fewer observations of the authors related to the topic addressed.

 

Research methods

The authors mentioned in the abstract that they used a novel methodology for assessing the development of tourism infrastructure in the capital city of Kazakhstan. Reading this section, the novel methodology is neither mentioned nor described. The authors refer to several indicators more related to the tourist traffic (number of tourists). This indicator is not relevant to assess the infrastructure from qualitative or quantitative perspective. It should be described specific method(s) for the assessment of tourism infrastructure.

Furthermore, in the first part of the research methods sections, the authors make a theoretical presentation of the importance of tourism infrastructure that would be more appropriate to be included in the literature reference section.

The authors should divide this section:

-methods

-data collection

 

Results and discussion

As I mentioned before, you included too many details about the historical and political administrative evolution of the county and of the capital city.

You should focus more on the assessment of the tourism infrastructure, including several maps related to it (including for mapping accessibility).

Discussion

The discussion section is missing

The authors should critically present the results in a synthetic way and compare them with results obtained in other studies focused on similar methodology or with other similar case studies located in different countries to highlight similarities or differences.

I recommend you to include in this section:  the expected benefits and contribution of the study (not only from methodologically point of view, but focusing on implication for policy, practice in terms of sustainable tourism), the limit(s) of the study and future research.

Minor comments

Fig. 1 – to mention the source, if it is elaborated by the authors, they can be mention: own elaboration

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

Thank you for your objective review. Really your recommendations will allow to improve the quality of the scientific article significantly.

 

Based on your recommendations and comments, all items have been worked on:

 

1) We added a literature review, cited similar studies and references to these papers, and revised the introduction as recommended. We included an aim and objectives that reflect the novelty and formulate the research questions.

The objective of the study was to ascertain the level of tourist attractiveness and the factors that contribute to it, to evaluate the extent of infrastructure development in Astana city, and to identify the challenges associated with tourist infrastructure.

In order to fulfil this goal, the following tasks have been set and formulated, which will be solved:

What is the current level of tourist attractiveness of the city of Astana? The principal factors influencing the city's tourist appeal have been identified. The current state and level of development of tourist infrastructure in Astana are presented. Issues and barriers that impede the development of tourist infrastructure in the city are identified. The perceptions of local residents and tourists regarding the tourist attractiveness of the city are analysed. The article also examines the most attractive natural, cultural and historical resources for tourists. Additionally, it assesses the level of digitalisation and the availability of information about tourist facilities and services in the city.

 

2) The literature review was moved to the second section, which was renamed the study description.

Tourism infrastructure is broadly defined as the ensemble of physical and organizational structures that support tourism activities [1,3]. Its primary components include:

Transportation Infrastructure: Airports, railways, and public transport systems ensuring connectivity.

Accommodation Facilities: Hotels, hostels, serviced apartments.

Cultural and Recreational Spaces: Museums, heritage sites, parks, and entertainment zones.

ICT (Information and Communication Technology): Platforms providing information and facilitating bookings [12].

The integration of smart technologies, such as augmented reality for navigation and automated hotel services, has redefined the concept of tourism infrastructure [16].

Research highlights a bidirectional relationship between urban development and tourism infrastructure:

Economic Contributions: Investment in tourism infrastructure often triggers economic growth by generating employment and increasing local revenue [17].

Cultural Preservation: Revitalization of historical sites and cultural spaces enhances both urban aesthetics and tourism appeal [18].

Social Impacts: Improved infrastructure benefits not only tourists but also residents, fostering urban inclusivity [19].

However, over-tourism and infrastructure strain in cities like Venice and Barcelona demonstrate the challenges of balancing growth and sustainability [20-23].

Scholars have developed various methods to assess urban tourism infrastructure:

Quantitative Approaches: Tourism Competitiveness Index (TCI): Evaluates infrastructure alongside other tourism-enabling factors [21].

Accessibility Metrics: Focus on the availability and connectivity of key infrastructure components.

Qualitative Approaches: Surveys and interviews to capture user experiences and satisfaction levels [22].

Case studies examining best practices in infrastructure development.

Spatial Analysis: Use of GIS (Geographic Information Systems) to map and evaluate the distribution of tourism facilities [18, 22].

Smart tourism has emerged as a critical area of focus in infrastructure studies. Key innovations include: Digital Infrastructure: Smart apps and platforms that improve tourist experience and infrastructure efficiency [28].

Sustainable Urban Mobility: Electric buses, bike-sharing systems, and pedestrian-friendly zones [29]. Resilient Infrastructure: Systems designed to withstand climate change impacts and urban pressures [27]. Smart tourism cities such as Seoul and Amsterdam exemplify the integration of advanced technologies into urban infrastructure planning.

Research on urban tourism infrastructure highlights its central role in shaping a city's global competitiveness and local livability. While significant progress has been made, issues such as over-tourism, environmental degradation, and infrastructure inequality persist. Future studies should focus on integrating smart technologies, promoting sustainability, and fostering inclusive urban development.

 

3) The research methods have been specified. Specificity has been added. The stages of the research have been highlighted. The comprehensiveness of the research was determined.

 

4)  The ‘Results and Discussion’ section has been divided according to the recommendation, and supplemented with the following.

The historical section provides a concise account of the city's evolution, delineating the period preceding its designation as the capital and the subsequent era. Additionally, it offers an assessment of the infrastructure.

The discussion section was highlighted and added

A separate Analysis section has been provided. According to the methodology, the infrastructure was analysed by main clusters

 

Analyses.

1. transport accessibility.

The accessibility of a city to tourists is contingent upon the availability of an effective transport infrastructure. This study examined the following aspects of transport accessibility: international and domestic transport links.

Nursultan Nazarbayev International Airport provides regular air services to major cities around the world. However, despite the airport's high capacity, periodic flight delays and a limited number of direct international destinations reduce its competitiveness.

Railway services in Astana represent a significant component of the city's domestic transportation infrastructure. While the Nurly Zhol station has undergone modernisation, concerns have been raised regarding congestion during peak periods.

The urban transport system is comprised of buses, though there is a lack of a metro or tram network, which presents challenges for tourists attempting to navigate the city.

The development of infrastructure for alternative modes of transport, such as the construction of cycle lanes and the introduction of electric scooters, remains limited.

An analysis of tourist feedback indicates that navigation issues and an inadequate number of public transport routes have a detrimental impact on the overall comfort of travel.

The majority of tourist attractions, including Baiterek, Khazret Sultan Mosque and the National Museum, are situated in close proximity and can be reached with ease. However, the transportation infrastructure to remote locations, such as ethnographic centres and natural attractions, is in need of enhancement.

2. Quality of accommodation.

The city of Astana offers a diverse range of accommodation options, from high-end hotels to budget-friendly hostels. In order to assess the quality of these establishments, a number of parameters were taken into consideration.

The city of Astana is home to a number of international hotel chains, including Hilton, Marriott, and Radisson. This provides an attractive proposition for business travellers.

For those with limited financial resources, there is a selection of hostels and apartments available, though the quality of these options can vary considerably and there is often a discrepancy between the number of rooms available and the demand for them.

As part of the study, respondents were randomly surveyed in all neighbourhoods of the city in hotels and hostels to assess the level of service. Over 1,000 individuals were surveyed in 2024.

The questionnaire data indicates that business travellers hold the quality of service in mid-range and high-end hotels in high regard. However, individual tourists have identified shortcomings in the adaptation of budget accommodation facilities to international standards.

The language barrier persists as a significant challenge. A notable proportion of hotels lack English-speaking staff, which creates difficulties for foreign tourists. While the cost of accommodation in medium and high-class hotels aligns with international standards, budget options are often perceived as exceeding their fair market value in terms of the quality of services provided.

3. public spaces

Public spaces constitute an essential component of the tourism infrastructure, offering tourists opportunities for recreation, walking, and social interaction. The assessment of the condition of public spaces in Astana encompasses the following elements:

The park areas

The city is home to modern park spaces, including the Presidential Park and the Astana Botanical Garden Park. These facilities are popular with both tourists and the local population.

Nevertheless, an analysis of the feedback indicates that some parks are lacking in infrastructure, such as toilets, benches and lighting, which detracts from their overall comfort for visitors.

The designation of certain areas as pedestrian zones

The city centre boasts extensive pedestrian spaces, such as the square around Baiterek, which foster favourable conditions for walking (see Figures 3, 4 and 9).

A dearth of landscaped areas in outlying districts from the city centre constrains tourists in their exploration of other parts of the city (Figure 13), particularly in the sulphurous region (Baikonur and Saryarka districts).

In terms of cultural and entertainment areas, the city has a number of facilities that cater to a variety of interests.

Cultural facilities such as the National Museum of Kazakhstan and the Nazarbayev Centre are equipped with advanced multimedia systems and well-maintained recreational areas. Restaurants, cafés and shopping centres provide a diverse range of leisure options. However, there is a dearth of local gastronomy and ethnic restaurants in certain tourist areas, including the Baikonursky and Almaty districts (Figure 13).

 

5) Conclusions were specified according to the analyses carried out. Specific recommendations based on the results of the research were given.

 

6) Added information on figure 1, as per comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study evaluates the development status of tourism infrastructure in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, analyzes its impact on tourism growth, and proposes policy recommendations for further development. However, the main shortcomings of this paper in terms of methodology, models, and data indicators lie in the lack of systematic methods, a lack of innovation and adaptability in the models, limited and insufficient quantitative data analysis, the omission of dynamic analysis of time series data, and the absence of multi-level comparisons. These weaknesses make the study’s conclusions insufficiently scientific and practical to support effective policy-making. Therefore, I must oppose the publication of this article in its current form. Specific comments are as follows:

• The paper lacks in-depth, data-driven analysis, limiting insights into the impact of tourism infrastructure on Astana’s development. Apart from some basic tourism indicators, it does not use more quantitative data to reinforce conclusions on infrastructure demand and tourism growth potential.

• Although the paper mentions multiple indicators (such as the Berete-Defert Index, Defert Index, and Schneider Index) to evaluate Astana’s tourism infrastructure, their application and explanation are inadequate. The paper does not clearly describe the calculation processes and practical steps for these indicators, nor does it discuss or analyze the results. The paper fails to explain the rationale behind choosing these specific indicators and does not elaborate on their relevance to Astana’s unique circumstances or specific infrastructure needs, raising doubts about the applicability and accuracy of these indicators.

• The models used in the paper are mostly generic infrastructure evaluation models and lack localization adaptations to Astana’s specific geographic, cultural, or socio-economic context. For example, the study does not consider Astana’s unique needs as a capital city in attracting international tourists and hosting large-scale international events, nor does it propose corresponding model adjustments to account for its rapidly growing population and economic development. The infrastructure assessment relies mainly on single indicators, such as the number of accommodations and tourism companies, without utilizing more multidimensional data. This limited data source fails to comprehensively reflect the actual development level of tourism infrastructure.

• The recommendations proposed in the paper are too general and lack operational feasibility. The study does not propose specific measures to help policymakers address the challenges of infrastructure development, reducing the study’s practical value.

• The paper does not make adequate use of time series data to track and analyze the dynamic relationship between infrastructure development and tourism growth. As a rapidly developing city, Astana has experienced significant changes in its infrastructure and tourism in recent years. However, the paper does not present these trends, overlooking the potential causal relationship between infrastructure expansion and policy impact.

• The study only provides a single-city analysis of Astana’s infrastructure status, lacking cross-city comparisons (such as with other major cities in Central Asia or international capitals and tourist cities of similar scale).

Author Response

Comments 1: The article was revised in accordance with the feedback provided by three reviewers. The article demonstrates the significance of infrastructure development in urban areas, particularly in capital cities, as a crucial element in the growth of both domestic and international tourism. We have proposed a number of methodologies, and several such studies are described. Furthermore, the article has been revised in terms of methodology and new source data have been incorporated, which were absent from the original version. Specific analyses of infrastructure data have been included. Questionnaire data on tourists in different areas of the city have been incorporated, and a comparative analysis of neighbourhoods according to infrastructure has been conducted.

It can be stated with confidence that the data presented in Tables 1 and 2, which illustrate the fluctuations in tourist numbers over time, along with an analysis of the underlying causes and patterns, are based on temporary data.

Comments 2: The objective of the study was to ascertain the level of tourist attractiveness and the factors that contribute to it, to evaluate the extent of infrastructure development in Astana city, and to identify the challenges associated with tourist infrastructure.

Comments 3: We've made a few tweaks to the conclusions as recommended. There are a few points where we don't see eye to eye with the reviewer:

The text provides specific quantitative data on the number of local and foreign tourists over a number of years. It also offers a comparative analysis of the development of infrastructure and the facilities that attract foreign and, most importantly, local tourists. The importance of infrastructure in the development of local tourism is demonstrated. Furthermore, the potential for foreign tourism development is illustrated with reference to the increase in international forums and international exhibitions.

The text provides an account of the distinctive characteristics of the local architectural style, outlines the details of notable natural and cultural landmarks, and, following a period of review, offers insights into the infrastructure of the region.

Comments 4: In accordance with the recommendations of the reviewer, the target recommendations on infrastructure development were adjusted and supplemented. The specificity of the problems of infrastructure development was introduced.

Comments 5: In response to the final remark regarding a comparative analysis with other capitals, it should be noted that the primary objective was to illustrate the interdependence between tourism development and the advancement of infrastructure, as well as the influence of international politics. The objective was not to undertake a comparative analysis of capitals in different countries, although this would undoubtedly be a fruitful avenue for future research. However, it is essential to consider the factor of the capital's longevity, given that Astana is not only the youngest capital in Central Asia but also in the world.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you very much for sending you this article. The article talks about how there is a potential tourism infrastructure in the capital Astane. In that sense it is very interesting for readers who know little about this city and country. The registration of tourist spots is relevant and the analysis is very descriptive. In that sense, in my opinion the main point to improve the article, the conclusions are presented as descriptive and also, one could make a scheme with figure 2 but with the findings, conclusions and facts to support the central hypothesis of the article, which is intuited but not evident.

In this sense, the proposed improvement is 

1.- improve the conclusions

2.- to make an outline and interpret it in accordance with the discussion and methodology. 

 

Author Response

Comments 1: The methodology figure diagram on your recommendation has been disclosed in more detail with textual information. 

In order to achieve the objectives of the study and obtain objective data, a comprehensive approach was employed, encompassing both qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. The research is aimed at studying the level of tourist attractiveness, the state of infrastructure and identifying key problems in the development of tourism infrastructure in Astana city.

Comments 2: The hypothesis of the article was fleshed out on your recommendation. 

The objective of the study was to ascertain the level of tourist attractiveness and the factors that contribute to it, to evaluate the extent of infrastructure development in Astana, and to identify the challenges facing the city's tourism infrastructure.

In order to achieve this objective, the following tasks have been identified and formulated, which will be addressed:

What is the current level of tourist attractiveness of the city of Astana. The principal factors influencing the city's tourist appeal have been identified. The current state and level of development of tourist infrastructure in Astana were demonstrated. The problematic issues and barriers that impede the development of tourist infrastructure in the city were identified. It was revealed how local residents and tourists assess the tourist attractiveness of the city. The article demonstrated which natural, cultural and historical resources of the city are the most attractive for tourists. It also demonstrated the level of digitalisation and availability of information about tourist facilities and services in the city.

Comments 3: The conclusions and specific recommendations were also fleshed out and detailed. 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I consider that the manuscript has been improved.

You did not present more detailed the discussion section. It is very important to critically present the results obtained in comparisons with other results from other similar studies. Moreover, it is important to formulate the  expected benefits and contribution of the study (not only from methodologically point of view, but focusing on implication for policy).

Moreover, the presentation of the results is even in this stage quite descriptive.

Author Response

Comments 1: In the discussion section, case studies of detailed studies in world capitals have been provided. Results from other studies were presented. In particular, the impact of the development of Smart City systems on tourist flows and infrastructure development was discussed. In addition, the contribution of infrastructure development to local population and job growth was exemplified using Bangkok as an example.

 

Comments 2: The analysis is extended to include data on transport infrastructure development and the preconditions for such development.

 

Comments 3: In addition, the conclusions have been made more specific by adding a diagram illustrating the link between infrastructure development and increased tourist flows. In addition, examples of typical tourism development in other major cities in relation to infrastructure development were provided.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although it has been revised, the current article uses more qualitative textual expressions and lacks sufficient quantitative analysis support. This makes the article slightly less persuasive. It is recommended that the author add more systematic quantitative analysis and conduct in-depth mining of relevant data. For example, data such as the growth of tourist numbers and the development of regional tourism infrastructure can be processed through statistical analysis and trend modeling, and the analysis results can be displayed in charts to more intuitively and effectively support the research conclusions.

There are few charts in the article, and the depth and breadth of data visualization need to be further enhanced. It is recommended to add more charts to show the results of quantitative analysis.

The current conclusion part is relatively loose and lacks systematicity and orderliness. It is recommended to add a framework diagram or table in the final discussion and summary to refine and sort out the important conclusions of the article. The following points can be included: Classification of key findings (for example: advantages, obstacles, and suggestions for improvement). Specific conclusions supported by data (such as indicator performance, quantitative results). Prioritization of practice or policy recommendations.

Author Response

Comments 1: The discussion section delved into specific examples of in-depth studies conducted in various world capitals, providing a comprehensive overview of their findings. Key insights from these studies were highlighted, with a particular focus on the influence of Smart City Systems on tourist flows and the subsequent development of urban infrastructure. The analysis also included a case study from Bangkok, which showcased how advancements in infrastructure contribute not only to increased tourism but also to local economic benefits, such as job creation and improvements in the quality of life for residents.

Comments 2: To enrich the analysis, additional data on the evolution of transport infrastructure were incorporated, alongside an exploration of the driving factors and prerequisites that underpin such development. This allowed for a more nuanced understanding of how strategic infrastructure planning supports urban tourism growth.

Comments 3: The conclusions were further substantiated through the inclusion of a diagram illustrating the dynamic relationship between infrastructure development and the rise in tourist numbers. This visual representation helped clarify how investments in transport, technology, and amenities directly impact tourism outcomes. Additionally, the discussion was broadened by providing examples from other major cities that demonstrated typical patterns of tourism growth aligned with infrastructure advancements. These examples underscored the universal applicability of the findings and highlighted the importance of integrated planning for sustainable tourism development.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf