Digitalisation to Improve Automated Agro-Export Logistics: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I’ve gone through the paper. Its subject is related to the journal. It ca be recommended for publication if the my following concerns/comments are addressed in detail:

• While the study is described as "quantitative," it primarily relies on a systematic literature review, which is generally considered a qualitative research method.
• The eligibility criteria mention that studies must have an IMRD structure, but it is unclear why this was required. Many valuable studies in logistics and digitalization may not follow this structure. The authors should provide stronger justification for this choice.
• The paper does not specify how the risk of bias was assessed in the included studies. The traffic light model is mentioned, but details on how it was applied to individual studies are missing.
• The databases used (Scopus, WoS, Dimensions) are robust, but it is unclear whether non-English studies were considered. Were language restrictions applied? If so, this should be mentioned as a limitation.

• contribute to understanding digitalization in cross-border logistics.
• Figures and tables provide valuable insights, but they often lack detailed discussion in the text. For example, Figures 2–8 show trends, authors, and countries, but the manuscript does not analyze why certain authors or regions are dominant in this field.
• The manuscript should explore possible reasons behind observed trends—e.g., why has research in digital logistics peaked in 2023 and declined thereafter?
• The study heavily relies on bibliometric analysis but does not validate its findings with expert opinions, case studies, or real-world applications. Including a discussion on how bibliometric insights align with practical advancements in logistics would strengthen the paper.

 

Author Response

Point 1: While the study is described as "quantitative," it primarily relies on a systematic literature review, which is generally considered a qualitative research method.

The eligibility criteria mention that studies must have an IMRD structure, but it is unclear why this was required. Many valuable studies in logistics and digitalization may not follow this structure. The authors should provide stronger justification for this choice.

The paper does not specify how the risk of bias was assessed in the included studies. The traffic light model is mentioned, but details on how it was applied to individual studies are missing.

The databases used (Scopus, WoS, Dimensions) are robust, but it is unclear whether non-English studies were considered. Were language restrictions applied? If so, this should be mentioned as a limitation.

contribute to understanding digitalization in cross-border logistics.

Figures and tables provide valuable insights, but they often lack detailed discussion in the text. For example, Figures 2–8 show trends, authors, and countries, but the manuscript does not analyze why certain authors or regions are dominant in this field.

The manuscript should explore possible reasons behind observed trends—e.g., why has research in digital logistics peaked in 2023 and declined thereafter?

The study heavily relies on bibliometric analysis but does not validate its findings with expert opinions, case studies, or real-world applications. Including a discussion on how bibliometric insights align with practical advancements in logistics would strengthen the paper.

Response 1: Observations corrected

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments to the paper “Digitalisation to improve automated agro-export logistics: Comprehensive bibliometric analysis”

 

With the rise of IT，digitalisation plays an important role in industry now, especially in logistics as mentioned in this paper. This is a timely review of an interesting topic, however the following concerns should be addressed before its publication:

 

1. All abbreviations should be explained, so is the term IMRD on page 3 of 20.
2. The papers are cited in terms of name and year, where papers are organized chronologically. Hence it is not feasible to connect the citations with the corresponding paper. For example, the reviewer is not sure if Ref.42 was cited or not. Moreover, most figures are simply put forward without mentioning in the main body. This indeed leads to confusion. For example, on page 11 of 20 line 290, what does “the figure” mean? Figure 9 or Figure 10.

Author Response

Point 1: All abbreviations should be explained, so is the term IMRD on page 3 of 20.

Response 1: Observations corrected

 

Point 2: The papers are cited in terms of name and year, where papers are organized chronologically. Hence it is not feasible to connect the citations with the corresponding paper. For example, the reviewer is not sure if Ref.42 was cited or not. Moreover, most figures are simply put forward without mentioning in the main body. This indeed leads to confusion. For example, on page 11 of 20 line 290, what does “the figure” mean? Figure 9 or Figure 10.

Response 2: Observations corrected

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper explores the impact of digitalization on automated agro - export logistics via bibliometric analysis. It has strengths such as a clear research objective and use of multiple databases. However, it also has notable flaws. The data source comprehensiveness, sampling biases, and fragmented theoretical framework are concerning. Additionally, the analysis of industry - specific factors and challenges is insufficient. Overall, while the topic is relevant, significant revisions are needed to enhance the study's rigor and contribution.

1. The study utilized Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Dimensions databases. However, are these databases comprehensive enough to represent the entire body of research on digitalisation in agro - export logistics? Given the global nature of the topic, were there any regional or specialized databases that could have been included to enhance the comprehensiveness of the analysis and improve the generalizability of the findings?
2. The authors employed a bibliometric analysis. While this is a valid approach, the sampling process raises some concerns. The initial search in the databases resulted in a large number of records (1346 in total), but only 32 were finally included in the review. How were the filters applied to select these 32 studies? Were there any biases introduced during the selection process, especially considering the exclusion of a significant number of records?
3. The paper mentions some theories related to digital transformation in logistics, but the theoretical framework seems fragmented. How do the different theories (such as the theory of digital transformation) interact with each other in the context of agro - export logistics?
4. The study briefly mentions challenges like employee resistance and economic and political impediments in the discussion section. However, these challenges are not thoroughly analyzed. What are the specific mechanisms through which these challenges affect the implementation of digitalisation in agro - export logistics? Are there any quantitative or qualitative data that could be used to measure the impact of these challenges more precisely?
5. Although the research focuses on agro - export logistics, the analysis does not fully explore the unique characteristics of the agricultural industry. How do factors such as perishable goods, seasonality, and specific regulatory requirements in the agricultural sector influence the digitalisation process? Were there any studies in the selected literature that specifically addressed these industry - specific aspects, and if so, how were they incorporated into the analysis?
6. The results section presents various bibliometric findings, but there is a lack of validation. Are there any external data sources or real - world case studies that could be used to validate the bibliometric results? For example, could the authors compare their findings with actual industry data on cost reduction or efficiency improvement in agro - export logistics companies?

Author Response

Point 1: The study utilized Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Dimensions databases. However, are these databases comprehensive enough to represent the entire body of research on digitalisation in agro - export logistics? Given the global nature of the topic, were there any regional or specialized databases that could have been included to enhance the comprehensiveness of the analysis and improve the generalizability of the findings?

Response 1: Observations corrected

Point 2: The authors employed a bibliometric analysis. While this is a valid approach, the sampling process raises some concerns. The initial search in the databases resulted in a large number of records (1346 in total), but only 32 were finally included in the review. How were the filters applied to select these 32 studies? Were there any biases introduced during the selection process, especially considering the exclusion of a significant number of records?

Response 2: Observations corrected

Point 3: The paper mentions some theories related to digital transformation in logistics, but the theoretical framework seems fragmented. How do the different theories (such as the theory of digital transformation) interact with each other in the context of agro - export logistics?

Response 3: Observations corrected

Point 4: The study briefly mentions challenges like employee resistance and economic and political impediments in the discussion section. However, these challenges are not thoroughly analyzed. What are the specific mechanisms through which these challenges affect the implementation of digitalisation in agro - export logistics? Are there any quantitative or qualitative data that could be used to measure the impact of these challenges more precisely?

Response 4: Observations corrected

Point 5: Although the research focuses on agro - export logistics, the analysis does not fully explore the unique characteristics of the agricultural industry. How do factors such as perishable goods, seasonality, and specific regulatory requirements in the agricultural sector influence the digitalisation process? Were there any studies in the selected literature that specifically addressed these industry - specific aspects, and if so, how were they incorporated into the analysis?

Response 5: Observations corrected

Point 6: The results section presents various bibliometric findings, but there is a lack of validation. Are there any external data sources or real - world case studies that could be used to validate the bibliometric results? For example, could the authors compare their findings with actual industry data on cost reduction or efficiency improvement in agro - export logistics companies?

Response 6: Observations corrected

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

all of my concerns have been addressed

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been sufficiently improved.