Review Reports - Determining Logistical Strategies to Mitigate Supply Chain Disruptions in Maritime Shipping for a Resilient and Sustainable Global Economy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title clearly reflects the study’s scope and focus on maritime supply chain disruptions. The abstract could be improved by being more precise. Expressions like “some strategies” do not adequately convey the substance of the research. The methodological approach, particularly the use of AHP, should be stated explicitly. A more focused summary of the study’s contribution and findings would also help readers quickly understand the significance and direction of the paper.

The introduction effectively highlights the critical role of maritime logistics in global trade and outlines the growing need for resilient supply chain structures. At the same time, the presence of numerous citation errors (e.g., “[Error! Reference source not found.]”) disrupts the narrative and reduces the professionalism of the presentation. The discussion is comprehensive but would benefit from a more clearly defined research problem. Strengthening the articulation of the research gap and the specific objectives of the paper would provide better context and improve the flow into the subsequent sections.

The literature review covers a wide range of relevant topics, including global economic shifts, trade routes, and supply chain interdependencies. The content demonstrates familiarity with key themes, yet the review tends to describe rather than analyze. There is room to more critically engage with current academic discussions and to better highlight where existing research falls short. This would help establish a stronger foundation for the study’s relevance. Some background content, especially on historical economic developments, could be shortened to keep the focus on the logistics challenges at the core of the paper.

The choice to apply AHP within a qualitative exploratory framework is appropriate for this type of strategic assessment. Still, more clarity is needed regarding how the authors derived the comparison values used in the AHP. If expert input was involved, it should be specified who these participants were, how they were selected, and what their qualifications were. The qualitative component of the research is mentioned but not fully explained. A clearer description of how qualitative data were gathered and integrated into the analysis would enhance transparency and replicability.

The results are structured well and the AHP process appears to have been followed correctly. The priority weights and consistency checks are helpful and lend credibility to the analysis. That said, the discussion does not fully explore the meaning of these results. It would strengthen the manuscript to reflect on why some strategies ranked higher than others and what these priorities suggest in practice. For example, the relatively low rank of cybersecurity is unexpected given its prominence in recent industry discourse. Adding comparisons with findings from other studies or industry reports would deepen the analysis and demonstrate greater engagement with real-world dynamics.

he manuscript is well-organized, but the writing would benefit from further editing to improve clarity and academic tone. Certain sentences are overly long or awkwardly constructed, and paragraph transitions could be improved to make the argument flow more naturally. A language review by a professional editor or an experienced academic peer would help bring consistency and polish to the text. Reducing redundancy and improving sentence structure will also help readers stay focused on the key ideas.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our work and strengthening it through your insightful comments. In response, we have addressed each of your observations and indicated the corresponding corrections in the manuscript, referencing the relevant page numbers.

With our regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer I

Comment 1.

Response 1.

The abstract was developed more precisely, expressions such as "Some strategies" that did not adequately convey the essence of the research were deleted and a new abstract was added to the study as follows. (line 11);

Abstract: International trade plays a pivotal role in shaping global supply chains, which are increasingly vulnerable to disruptions caused by geopolitical tensions, pandemics, and environmental disasters. These disturbances, particularly in maritime logistics, can trigger cascading effects across global industries. This study aims to identify and prioritize strategic responses to such disruptions by employing a combined qualitative exploratory approach and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Expert judgments were obtained from 32 senior professionals across the maritime logistics and port management sectors during a structured evaluation conducted in the second quarter of 2025. AHP was utilized to systematically assess these inputs and determine the relative importance of resilience strategies. The results emphasize the need for adaptive, proactive, and sustainable logistics approaches to ensure long-term stability in maritime trade. By bridging a gap in the literature concerning integrated assessment of disruption responses, the study offers valuable insights for industry stakeholders and policymakers navigating an increasingly volatile global trade environment.

Comment 2.

The methodological approach, particularly the use of AHP, should be stated explicitly.

Response 2.

The methodological approach has been redefined under the heading of Methodology and added to the study in a way that is clearly stated below (line 75).

Methodology

This study is organized into two principal sections, followed by an analytical discussion that addresses the research questions outlined in the introduction. The first section explores the global economy, international trade, and global supply chains, with particular emphasis on the interrelationships among these domains. The second section investigates the disruptions affecting global maritime logistics processes, approached from multiple analytical perspectives. By examining the global economy, trade, and supply chains as an integrated framework within the context of maritime logistics, this research offers a distinctive contribution. It aims to establish a foundational analytical structure for policymakers and serves as a critical point of reference for scholars engaged in related fields. The study employs a qualitative exploratory methodology to assess how resilience and sustainability can be strengthened in maritime logistics within broader supply chain operations. Utilizing a holistic approach, it seeks to answer two central research questions articulated at the outset of the study.

The methodology outlined in Figure-1 was applied to answer the research question.

Comment 3.

A more focused summary of the study’s contribution and findings would also help readers quickly understand the significance and direction of the paper.

Response 3.

The abstract has been modified as follows to provide a more focused summary of the study's contribution and findings, helping readers more quickly understand the significance and direction of the paper; (lines 11-24);

Comment 4.

Response 4.

Citation errors corrected

Comment 5.

The discussion is comprehensive but would benefit from a more clearly defined research problem. Strengthening the articulation of the research gap and the specific objectives of the paper would provide better context and improve the flow into the subsequent sections.

Response 5.

Research problems and answers is defined in the conclusion as below (lines 11-24);

Maritime logistics disruptions are handled to address the first research question by examining real-world case studies to assess their effects. Accordingly, the study introduces the tools and strategies for maintaining the resilience and sustainability of the global trade system, which are essential for economic development, international cooperation, and market stability. In this regard the strategic alternatives such as diversifying shipping routes, exploring alternative ports, utilizing inland transportation options, investing in digitalization and automation, improving port efficiency, establishing strong supplier relationships, enhancing cybersecurity, were considered for prioritization in the context of maritime logistics and supply chain network. For answering the second research question, the structural changes, necessary in maritime logistics to improve sustainability and resilience in the near future, are investigated in detailed. Mitigating the adverse effects of maritime logistics disruptions, several proactive measures—tailored to specific operational contexts—are proposed. These include the diversification of maritime routes, the utilization of alternative port facilities, and the integration of inland transportation networks to alleviate congestion. Additionally, embracing digital transformation through advanced technologies such as AI, IoT, blockchain, and digital twin systems can significantly enhance supply chain visibility and support data-driven decision-making. Establishing strategic partnerships with multiple suppliers and logistics providers further contributes to operational flexibility and risk reduction. Moreover, investing in the modernization and expansion of port infrastructure is essential for improving overall efficiency and resilience within maritime logistics systems.

Comment 6.

Response 6.

Below is removed from abstract; (line 11);

. As economies expand and multinational corporations rise within a global competitive framework, the need for complex supply chains has grown. International trade is heavily reliant on maritime transport, with over 90 percent of traded goods being shipped by sea.

Below is removed from introduction; (line 32)

Their success depends on one another.
The removal of trade barriers and the smooth flow of goods—traced back to the earliest barter systems are essential for the sustainability and growth of the global economy, and they refer to the primary objective of SC decision-makers.

Below is removed from 2.1. Dynamics of Global Economy; (line 181)

In the 1500s, it was estimated to be around $250–500 billion. The 1950s saw rapid growth due to post-World War II recovery, industrialization, and expanding global trade, with the world economy valued at approximately $4 trillion.

Comment 7.

Response 7.

To identify and prioritize strategic responses to maritime supply chain disruptions, this study employed the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) within a qualitative exploratory framework. Expert input was obtained from 32 professionals actively working in maritime logistics, port operations, ship management, and international freight forwarding. These participants were selected through purposive sampling, based on their minimum 10 years of industry experience and direct involvement in strategic decision-making during previous disruption events. Between February and April 2025, expert data were collected through structured pairwise comparison forms (based on Saaty’s 1–9 scale) and semi-structured interviews. The interviews aimed to explore expert insights into disruption types, vulnerabilities, and resilience strategies, and were conducted either in person or online depending on participant availability. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis, and the emergent themes—such as “flexibility in port operations,” “digital infrastructure,” and “multi-modal coordination”—informed the construction of the AHP hierarchy. Individual pairwise comparison matrices were developed accordingly, and their consistency ratios (CR) were calculated to ensure reliability; all matrices satisfied the CR < 0.10 threshold. This integrated approach enabled the systematic incorporation of qualitative expert knowledge into the multi-criteria decision-making framework. (line 624)

Comment 8.

Response 8.

The AHP results revealed a clear hierarchy among the evaluated resilience strategies, reflecting the priorities of maritime logistics professionals based on their operational experiences. Strategies such as flexible port operations, route redundancy, and intermodal coordination ranked highest, likely due to their immediate applicability and direct impact on maintaining supply chain continuity during recent disruptions. In contrast, cybersecurity received a relatively lower ranking. This outcome should not be interpreted as a dismissal of its importance. Rather, it reflects a relative prioritization, where physical and logistical challenges were perceived as more urgent by the participating experts. Given that many of these professionals have recently dealt with tangible disruptions such as port closures, congestion, or rerouting, their emphasis naturally gravitated toward strategies that address such events directly. The results suggest a practical orientation in resilience planning—favoring short-term, operationally visible solutions—while potentially underestimating longer-term or less immediately observable threats. This highlights the importance of ensuring that resilience strategies strike a balance between operational urgency and strategic foresight, integrating both physical and digital risk domains in a comprehensive approach. (line 698)

Comment 9.

The manuscript is well-organized, but the writing would benefit from further editing to improve clarity and academic tone. Certain sentences are overly long or awkwardly constructed, and paragraph transitions could be improved to make the argument flow more naturally. A language review by a professional editor or an experienced academic peer would help bring consistency and polish to the text. Reducing redundancy and improving sentence structure will also help readers stay focused on the key ideas.

Response 9.

Overly long sentences were shortened. Advice from a professional editor was sought.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for your interesting work. Unfortunately, it is not yet in a form of a scientific article – you should focus much more on the exact research you are making and decrease the general introduction and history.

Please

Make the general introduction shorter. Make it more clear what you are studying, not writing pages of general introduction to the topic. At the moment sections 2-6 are presenting enormously large research area in a a just couple of paragraphs. It would be advisable already in the beginning say what it the focus area and concentrate on it. For example Impact of maritime disruptions to global economy would require maybe 2-3 text books to be covered, not jus couple of paragraphs.
Please, write a new section presenting the methodology of the work and how the data was acquired. At the moment is it not clear where the numbers in Tables 3-7 come from. Thereafter, revise the whole paper, so that it is clear how the line of thought from the research questions to results go.
Please, answer the research questions at the end of the paper and discuss their merits and weaknesses.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

With our regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer II

Comment 1.

Make the general introduction shorter. Make it more clear what you are studying, not writing pages of general introduction to the topic.

Response 1.

The crossed out sections were removed from the introduction and the introduction was shortened as follows: (line 32)

International trade drives the global economy and shapes supply chains, while supply chains, in turn, influence trade and economic growth. Their success depends on one another. The removal of trade barriers and the smooth flow of goods—traced back to the earliest barter systems [‎1]—are essential for the sustainability and growth of the global economy, and they refer to the primary objective of SC decision-makers.

Disruptions in trade, whether caused by wars, political tensions, pandemics [1], or natural disasters [2] can trigger economic challenges at local, regional, or global levels [3]. Ensuring the resilience and sustainability of trade supports economic development, promotes international cooperation, and enhances market stability, because of the global competitive pressures have necessitated the development of complex logistics support systems, commonly referred to as supply chains [4]. seamless functioning of international trade, economies are becoming increasingly interdependent. As a result, market volumes have expanded, enabling economies of scale. Consequently, the growth of economies, the emergence of large-scale, high-budget multinational enterprises, and a free trade-oriented structure shaped by global competitive pressures have necessitated the development of complex logistics support systems, commonly referred to as Supply chains [‎5].

International trade carried out with the support of global supply chains is largely dependent on maritime. In line with these dynamics, maritime logistics plays a critical role in the logistics network supporting international trade, with almost 80 percent of traded cargo [‎5] being transported by sea. Therefore, disruptions in maritime logistics present significant challenges across various production processes in all sectors, due to the interconnected nature of supply chains [‎6,‎7,‎8]. These disruptions stem from various causes, including above reasons and others such adverse weather conditions that impede maritime traffic, maritime accidents, inadequate infrastructure and capacity in ports, global pandemics, and political or social unrest. Such interruptions can affect industries worldwide, leading to costly consequences that are difficult to mitigate.

This study focuses on the types and impacts of disruptions in maritime logistics processes, which are crucial for enhancing the durability and sustainability of the global economy and trade. It provides an overview of the current dynamics and key players in the global economy, and trade, as well as the epistemology of supply chains [‎9] and their relevance to seek the answers of two fundamental questions:

What are the consequences of maritime logistics disruptions, considering the real-life examples discussed in the study, and what strategies can be employed to mitigate them?
What structural changes are necessary in maritime logistics to improve sustainability and resilience in the near future?

The study is structured into two main sections, followed by an analysis that addresses the questions outlined above. While first section discusses the global economy, international trade, and global supply chains as well as the relationships among them, the second section examines the disruptions experienced in global maritime logistics processes from various perspectives. From this perspective, this research, aiming to provide a foundational framework for decision-makers and serves as a key reference for scholars in these areas, distinguishes itself by examining the global economy, trade, and Supply chains as an integrated whole within the context of maritime logistics.

The literature review has been conducted under the main headings of Interdependence between the Global Economy, International Trade, and Global Supply chains; Maritime Logistics as the Backbone of Global Trade; Disruptions in Maritime Logistics; and The Impact of Maritime Disruptions on the Global Economy. Based on the gaps identified in the literature, the research methodology has been determined accordingly.

Comment 2.

At the moment sections 2-6 are presenting enormously large research area in a just couple of paragraphs. It would be advisable already in the beginning say what it the focus area and concentrate on it. For example, Impact of maritime disruptions to global economy would require maybe 2-3 text books to be covered, not just couple of paragraphs.

Response 2.

The following paragraph was added between lines 158-165

Although simplified in figure, the impact of maritime disruptions on the global economy represents a broad and multifaceted paradigm, encompassing critical dimensions such as international trade, supply chain resilience, energy security, and geopolitical dynamics. Considering the pivotal role of maritime transport in sustaining global trade logistics, it becomes evident that a comprehensive analysis of these complex interrelations extends beyond the scope of a single study. Capturing the full breadth and depth of these dynamics requires a more expansive approach—one that aligns with the scale and detail typically found across multiple academic volumes or specialized textbooks.

Comment 3.

Please, write a new section presenting the methodology of the work and how the data was acquired.

Response 3.

The following paragraph was added under the methodology title between lines 79-92;

Comment 4.

Please, write a new section …. how the data was acquired.

Response 4.

The following paragraph was added under the methodology title between lines 105-123;

-Literature review; The literature review is systematically conducted under four key thematic headings: (1) the interdependence between the global economy, international trade and global supply chains; (2) maritime logistics as the backbone of global trade; (3) disruptions in maritime logistics; and (4) the impact of maritime disruptions on the global economy. To provide a comprehensive analysis, the review draws on a variety of academ-ic and professional sources, including reports from leading organizations such as the WTO, IMO and the UN, peer-reviewed journal articles, books, industry policy papers and institutional publications. Both theoretical and empirical studies, as well as data-driven reports and case studies, are included to provide a multi-dimensional understanding of the complex interrelationships between maritime logistics and the global economic systems. The references cited in this study were selected from highly cited, high-impact factor arti-cles published in journals specializing in maritime logistics, supply chains global econ-omy and international trade with a focus on recent publications within the literature re-view. All sources were obtained through, online databases, institutional and official web-sites. In addition to that, data were also gathered from academic activities such as focus group discussions, colloquiums, and symposiums, which included participation from representatives and experts from various logistics-focused non-governmental organizations and stakeholder universities.

Comment 5.

At the moment is it not clear where the numbers in Tables 3-7 come from. Thereafter, revise the whole paper, so that it is clear how the line of thought from the research questions to results go.

Response 5. (line 624)

The valid matrices were then aggregated using the geometric mean method to produce a consolidated group matrix, which forms the basis of Tables 3 to 7. This integrated approach enabled the systematic incorporation of qualitative expert knowledge into the multi-criteria decision-making framework.

Comment 6.

Please, answer the research questions at the end of the paper and discuss their merits and weaknesses.

Response 6.

At the end of the article, the following paragraphs are added that answers the research questions and mentions their advantages and disadvantages: (line 730)

Implementing proactive strategies in maritime logistics offers several key benefits. Diversifying shipping routes and using alternative ports increases the flexibility of supply chains and increases resilience during crises by reducing reliance on single points of failure. Integrating inland transportation options can further reduce congestion in major ports and facilitate smoother cargo flows. Technological innovations such as AI, IoT, blockchain, and digital twin technologies can significantly improve real-time visibility, predictive analytics, and decision-making capabilities within complex logistics networks. Additionally, encouraging partnerships with multiple suppliers and carriers can strengthen supply chain agility, while investments in port modernization help improve handling capacity and efficiency. However, these measures are not without their limitations. High implementation costs, especially for advanced technologies and infrastructure upgrades, can be prohibitive for small and medium-sized enterprises or emerging economies. Furthermore, relying on digital systems increases exposure to cybersecurity threats. Operational coordination among multiple stakeholders, often with conflicting interests, can also create challenges for smooth execution. Thus, while these strategies together contribute to more resilient and sustainable maritime logistics, their effectiveness depends on context-specific factors such as financial capacity, regulatory frameworks and technological readiness.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Referee comments

Main content：

This paper focuses on the supply chain disruptions in the maritime industry considering resilience and sustainability.

The study is specific and focuses on a topic worth investigating. However, I have some questions regarding the current manuscript. I recommend a major revision based on the following comments.

Major comments:

My first question is about the literature review part. This part contains 4 sections and seven pages, which is too much for a research article. Maybe compress this part and delete content not directly related to this study.
The next comment is about the organization of this manuscript. In the current version, I cannot tell which part each section belongs to by the section title.
Why put section 11. Methodology after 10. Conclusion.
Next is the Pairwise Comparison Matrix in Table 3. How is the matrix developed and how are the values determined? This matrix is critical for analysis.
As stated in the title and abstract, this study focuses on the strategies considering the resilience and sustainability of the economy, how are the two aspects reflected in the analysis?

Minor comments:

Please check the usage of abbreviations in the whole manuscript.

Please avoid using abbreviations in abstract. Also, unnecessary to use “SCs” for “supply chains”.

Please check the whole manuscript for typos.

Page 1 Line 20 and 21, “The aim of this study is to highlight the some strategies using a combined qualitative exploratory approach”.

Page 9, Line 392 and 393, “There are some proactive strategies to mitigate the impact of maritime disruptions, although its application varies according to my situation and time”. “My”?

Please check the format of the manuscript.

Page 2, Line 60–62.

The position of figures in the manuscript.

Figure 6 is incomplete.

Page 16, Line 587, “10..Conclusion”.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

With our regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer III

Major Comments:

Comment 1.

My first question is about the literature review part. This part contains 4 sections and seven pages, which is too much for a research article. Maybe compress this part and delete content not directly related to this study.

Response 1.

The sources in the literature that were not directly related to this study and were given as additional sources to strengthen the same content were deleted. The deleted sources are shown below by being crossed out. The total number of references was reduced from 82 to 60.

Deleted References

Kim, J., Conte, M., Oh, Y., and Park, J. (2024). From Barter to Market: An Agent-Based Model of Prehistoric Market Development. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 31(3), 1232-1271.
Younis, H.; Alsharairi, M.; Younes, H.; Sundarakani, B. (2023). The impact of COVID-19 on supply chains: Systematic Review and Future Research Directions. Operational Research of International Journal. 2023, 23, 48.
Ye, L. and Abe, M. (2012) The Impacts of Natural Disasters on Global Supply chains ARTNeT Working Paper Series, No. 115, Asia-Pacific Research and Training Network on Trade, Bangkok. ARTNeT. Available online: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/64267/1/717874087.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2025).
Grzybowska, K.; Stachowiak, A. (2022) Global Changes and Disruptions in Supply chains —Preliminary Research to Sustainable Resilience of supply chains. Energies, 15, 4579.

7.Rodriguez, J.M. and Palallos, L. (2024). An Analysis of Supply Chain Management: Crafting a Plan for Supply Chain and Inventory Management. International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology 12, 575.

Oluwafunmilayo E.; Funmilayo A.; Olufunke O. (2024). Supply Chain Integrating Sustainability and Ethics: Strategies for Modern Supply Chain Management. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews. 22. 1930-1953. 10.30574/wjarr.2024.22.1.1259.
Haas, E. B. (2024). Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization. ECPR Press. https://archive.org/details/beyondnationstat0000haas (accessed on 20 January 2025).
Chao L., Yongxi Y., Aoxiang Z., Biao C. (2023), Fuel Consumption-Reduction Investment Decisions and Coordination Contracts in Fuel Vehicle Supply Chains: A Dynamic Analysis, Energy Economics, Volume 125, 106799, doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.106799.
Park, Y.; Hong, P.; Roh, J.J. (2013) Supply Chain Lessons from the Catastrophic Natural Disaster in Japan, Bus. Horiz, 56, 75–85.
Anser, M.K.; Khan, M.A.; Nassani, A.A.; Abro, M.M.Q.; Zaman, K.; Kabbani, A. (2021) Does COVID-19 Pandemic Disrupt Sustainable Supply Chain Process? Covering Some New Global Facts. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021, 28, 59792–59804.
Liu, J.; Wang, X.; Chen, J. Port Congestion under the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Simulation-Based Countermeasures. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 2023, 183, 109474.
Soonhong, M.; Zach, G.Z and Carlo, D.S. (2019). Defining Supply Chain Management: In the Past, Present, and Future. Journal Business Logistics. , 40, 44–55.
Kain, R. and Verma A. (2018) Logistics Management in Supply Chain – An Overview, Materials Today: Proceedings, Volume 5, Issue 2, Part 1, 3811-3816, doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.11.634
Rodrigue, J.-P. (2024). The Geography of Transport systems (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003343196

45.Strusińska-Correia, A. (2017). Tsunami mitigation in Japan after the 2011 Tōhoku Tsunami. The International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 22, 397–441.

Domonoske, C.; Wamsley, L. (2024). The Economic Impact of the Baltimore Bridge Collapse. Available online:https://www.npr.org/2024/04/02/1242327964/the-economic-impact-of-the-baltimore-bridge-collapse (accessed on 20 January 2025).
Ojoajogu, A.M. The Role of Supply Chain Management on Customer Satisfaction. Peace Review. 2023, 4, 136–145.
Lapinskaitė, I.; Kuckailytė, J. (2014). The Impact of Supply Chain Cost on the Price of the Final Product. Business Management and Education. 12, 109–126.
Notteboom, T., Pallis, T., and Rodrigue, J. P. (2021). Disruptions and Resilience in Global Container Shipping and Ports: the COVID-19 Pandemic versus the 2008–2009 Financial Crisis. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 23(2), 179.
Pelling, M., Patwardhan, A., Hallegatte, S., Maskrey, A., Oki, T., Oswald Spring, U., and Viguie, V. (2012). Toward a Sustainable and Resilient Future. In Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 437-486). IPCC.
Cullinane, K., & Bergqvist, R. (2014). Emission control areas and their impact on maritime transport. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 28, 1-5.

Comment 2.

The next comment is about the organization of this manuscript. In the current version, I cannot tell which part each section belongs to by the section title.

Response 2.

Figure 1 was added to the study to make the organization of the manuscript more understandable. (line 74)

Comment 3.

Why put section 11. Methodology after 10. Conclusion.

Response 3.

The Methodology section was relocated and placed immediately after the Introduction. (line 60)

Comment 4.

Next is the Pairwise Comparison Matrix in Table 3. How is the matrix developed and how are the values determined? This matrix is critical for analysis.

Response 4.

(line 657) The matrix is developed by aggregating individual pairwise comparison matrices completed by 32 maritime logistics experts. Each expert evaluates the relative importance of the seven strategies using Saaty’s 1–9 fundamental scale. After verifying that each matrix satisfies the consistency threshold
(CR < 0.10), the valid matrices are combined using the geometric mean method. The resulting values in the matrix represent the consensus-based relative weights assigned to each strategy pair.

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1.0000	3.0000	4.0000	5.0000	5.0000	6.0000	6.0000
II	0.3333	1.0000	2.0000	3.0000	3.0000	4.0000	4.0000
III	0.2500	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000	3.0000	3.0000
IV	0.2000	0.3333	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000	2.0000
V	0.2000	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000
VI	0.1667	0.2500	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000
VII	0.1667	0.2500	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000

Table 3. Pairwise Comparison Matrix.

Comment 5.

As stated in the title and abstract, this study focuses on the strategies considering the resilience and sustainability of the economy, how are the two aspects reflected in the analysis?

Response 5.

The following paragraph has been added to lines 398-408 to reflect the aspects in the analysis;

The proposed strategies are complex structures affected by multiple interconnected factors with economic resilience and sustainability. Therefore, creating a well-diversified economic structure can cushion the impact of fluctuations that may arise from sector-specific maritime logistics. In addition, strong public financial management, together with controlled inflation and interest rates, can act as a hedge in times of economic instability. Maintaining manageable debt levels and implementing prudent fiscal strategies can contribute to the long-term sustainability of the economy. Environmentally sustainable economies that receive marine logistics support tailored to environmental concerns serve the purpose of reducing ecological damage and prioritizing investments in renewable energy, resource conservation and climate resilience. In addition, broad-based and diverse trade partnerships make the economy more resilient to maritime disruptions.

Minor comments:

Comment 6.

Please check the usage of abbreviations in the whole manuscript.

Response 6.

The abbreviations used throughout the article were checked, and a separate abbreviations list was added between lines 32-49.

Comment 7.

Please avoid using abbreviations in abstract. Also, unnecessary to use “SCs” for “supply chains”.

Response 7.

Al abbreviations in the abstracts and summaries have been changed. In addition, all ‘SCs’ in the study have been changed to "supply chains".

Comment 8.

Please check the whole manuscript for typos.

Response 8.

All manuscripts have been double-checked for typographical errors.

Comment 9.

Page 1 Line 20 and 21, “The aim of this study is to highlight the some strategies using a combined qualitative exploratory approach”.

Response 9.

It is replaced with blow sentence:

This study aims to highlight several strategies through a combined qualitative and exploratory approach.

Comment 10.

Page 9, Line 392 and 393, “There are some proactive strategies to mitigate the impact of maritime disruptions, although its application varies according to my situation and time”. “My”?

Response 10.

“My”? is replaced with “the”. New sentence; “There are some proactive strategies to mitigate the impact of maritime disruptions, although its application varies according to the situation and time”

Comment 11.

Please check the format of the manuscript. Page 2, Line 60–62.

Comment 11.

The formatting of Page 2, Lines 60–62 of the manuscript has been corrected.

Comment 12.

The position of figures in the manuscript.

Response 12.

The position of figures in the manuscript are arranged.

Comment 13.

Figure 6 is incomplete.

Response 13.

Figure 6 is completed as below. (line 531)

Comment 14.

Page 16, Line 587, “10..Conclusion”.

Response 14.

It is revised as “10.Conclusion”.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study is to highlight the some strategies using a combined qualitative exploratory approach for mitigate supply chain disruptions in maritime shipping for a resilient and sustainable global economy. It's meaningful and interesting. There are some minor issues to be addressed as follow:

-The abstract should be rewritten. Now it has not conveyed more contributions and novelty. Too much background introduction.

-Fig. 6 can not display all.

-Part 11 should be placed at the beginning of the article after part 1.

-Please list the abbreviations.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

With our regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer IV

The study is to highlight some strategies using a combined qualitative exploratory approach for mitigate supply chain disruptions in maritime shipping for a resilient and sustainable global economy. It's meaningful and interesting. There are some minor issues to be addressed as follow:

Comment 1.

The abstract should be rewritten. Now it has not conveyed more contributions and novelty.

Response 1.

The paragraph added in red to more effectively convey the contributions and novelty of the study has been incorporated into the abstract. (lines 11-24)

Comment 2.

Fig. 6 can not display all.

Response 2.

Figure 6. The Methodology for Exploring Alternative Ports.

The previous Figure 6 above has been replaced with the new Figure 6 below. (line 545)

Comment 3.

Part 11 should be placed at the beginning of the article after part 1.

Response 3.

Part 11 has been moved to the beginning of the article, placed immediately after Part 1

Comment 4.

Please list the abbreviations.

Response 4.

The list of abbreviations has been included in the revised text as shown below. (line 28)

Nomenclature

AGVs – Automated Guided Vehicles
AHP – Analytic Hierarchy Process
ECB – European Central Bank
EU – European Union
Federal Reserve – Central Bank of the United States
Forex – Foreign Exchange
GDP – Gross Domestic Product
IMF – International Monetary Fund
JIT – Just In Time
NAFTA – North American Free Trade Agreement
OPEC – Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
PBOC – People's Bank of China
TOS – Terminal Operating Systems
USMCA – United States Mexico Canada Agreement
USSR – Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Soviet Union)
WB – World Bank
WTO – World Trade Organization

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for the revised article. Unfortunately, there are still two major problems that were pointed out already in the first review round.

first seven chapters are of general introduction to the topic. This is too much for a scientific article. Please, put only 1-2 chapters of general introduction and literature review. Also show clearly how you came to the factors/strategic measures to be studied in your model. Be concise and place your arguments on literature.
The methodology is still unclear. After table 2, in line 721 – 722, it is said: „The matrix is developed by aggregating individual pairwise comparison matrix was 721 constructed matrices completed by 32 maritime logistics experts.” . Please show this matrix.

Looking forward for you next version of the article,

Yours, Ulla Tapaninen

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have spent on reviewing our work a second time.

We have strengthened our work with your valuable insightful comments.

We have indicated each of your observations with the relevant page numbers.

Best Regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer II (Round 2)

Comment 1.

first seven chapters are of general introduction to the topic. This is too much for a scientific article. Please, put only 1-2 chapters of general introduction and literature review.

Response 1.

In response to this comment, the first seven chapters, which were a general introduction to the subject, were reduced to a single chapter, and the following sections were removed from the text of the article.

(Line 171) The establishment of multinational corporations, government policies, and international trade agreements (e.g., WTO, NAFTA, EU trade policies) are among the key influencers of this process. Financial markets include global stock exchanges, bond markets, foreign exchange (Forex) markets, and commodity markets. Major institutions such as central banks (e.g., the Federal Reserve, ECB, PBOC), the IMF, and the WB play a significant role in managing these markets. The global labour market encompasses employment trends, wage levels, and migration patterns. It is influenced by factors like automation, education systems, and economic policies. Core industries, including manufacturing, agriculture, services, and sectors of the digital economy (such as AI, blockchain, and automation), are crucial to the growth of the global economy. Innovation within these sectors drives productivity and economic advancement. Economic policies, such as taxation, trade tariffs, and fiscal strategies, have a profound effect on the global economic landscape. Institutions like the IMF, WTO, and the World Bank play key roles in regulating and stabilizing economic systems. Natural resources such as oil, gas, minerals, and agricultural products are pivotal in shaping global trade and economic strategies. Significant players in this domain include OPEC, energy-producing nations, and emerging renewable energy markets. Global consumption patterns drive production and international trade. These patterns are influenced by factors like demographics, income distribution, and cultural preferences. Sovereign debt, corporate borrowing, and consumer credit systems have a profound impact on global economic stability. International financial institutions and central banks manage these systems. The divide between developed, emerging, and developing economies is a significant issue. International organizations like the UN and the WB work toward addressing these economic inequalities and promoting sustainable development.

(Line 181) This economic growth reflects major historical transformations, from agrarian empires to industrialized and technology-driven economies. For example, in the early modern period of the 1500s, the world's largest economy was China (Ming Dynasty), driven by agriculture, silk, porcelain, and trade. India (Mughal Empire) followed closely as a major economic power, with a thriving textile industry, agriculture, and extensive trade networks. The Ottoman Empire played a crucial role in facilitating trade between Europe, Asia, and Africa. Spain experienced a surge in wealth due to vast amounts of gold and silver extracted from the Americas, while France emerged as a rising European power with a strong agricultural base and expanding trade.

(Line 197) Japan and Germany continue to be major economic powers, excelling in high-tech industries and strong manufacturing sectors. India follows closely, with a rapidly expanding economy fuelled by its booming services and technology sectors. The largest economies in the world serve as the key drivers of economic growth and trade. These nations are influential due to their vast markets, technological innovations, and substantial international trade, shaping global economic trends.

Comment 2.

Also show clearly how you came to the factors/strategic measures to be studied in your model. Be concise and place your arguments on literature. After table 2, in line 721 – 722, it is said: „The matrix is developed by aggregating individual pairwise comparison matrix was 721 constructed matrices completed by 32 maritime logistics experts.” . Please show this matrix.

Response 2.

The section under the (5. Prioritization of The Strategies Based on the AHP Method) heading has been changed as follows and a matrix has been added as follows (line 559);

Prioritization of The Strategies Based on the AHP Method

…….

A pairwise comparison matrix was constructed using Saaty’s 1–9 fundamental scale to evaluate the relative importance of each strategy over the others. Saaty’s scale is demonstrated in Table 2 (Saaty and Vargas, 2001).

Table 2 Fundamental Scale (1–9) for Pairwise Comparisons

Numerical Value	Interpretation
1	Equal importance
3	Moderate importance
5	Strong importance
7	Very strong importance
9	Extreme importance
2, 4, 6, 8	Intermediate values between the two adjacent judgments
1/a	Reciprocal, when the second element is more important than the first

Utilizing Saaty’s fundamental scale, the pairwise comparison matrix was developed and is displayed in Table 3a and Table 3b. Table 3a presents an example of an individual pairwise comparison matrix provided by one of the 32 maritime logistics experts.

Each expert evaluated the relative importance of the seven resilience strategies using Saaty’s 1–9 scale, where "1" represents equal importance and "9" represents extreme importance of one element over another. The matrix reflects the expert’s judgments on the comparative importance between strategies, providing a basis for later aggregation.

Table 3a Example of Individual Pairwise Comparison Matrix

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1	3	4	5	5	5	6
II	1/3	1	2	3	3	3	4
III	1/4	1/2	1	2	2	2	3
IV	1/6	1/6	1/4	1	1	2	2
V	1/6	1/6	1/3	1/2	1	2	2
VI	1/6	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	1
VII	1/6	1/6	1/2	1/2	1/2	1	1

Comment 3.

The methodology is still unclear.

Response 3.

The methodology has been simplified and modified as follows for greater clarity (line 75);

This study is structured into two primary sections, followed by an analytical discussion that directly addresses the research questions introduced at the outset. The first section provides a comprehensive examination of the global economy, international trade, and global supply chains, with particular attention to the interdependencies among these domains. The second section focuses on the disruptions impacting global maritime logistics, analysed through multiple theoretical and practical lenses. By conceptualizing the global economy, trade, and supply chains as an integrated framework within the context of maritime logistics, this research makes a distinctive scholarly contribution. It endeavours to develop a foundational analytical model that can inform policymaking and serve as a critical reference point for academic inquiry in related disciplines. Adopting a qualitative exploratory methodology, the study investigates strategies for enhancing resilience and sustainability in maritime logistics as part of broader supply chain systems. Through a holistic analytical approach, the study aims to address the two central research questions posed in the introduction. From an analytical perspective, this study investigates the nature and implications of disruptions in maritime logistics, organized into two main sections, followed by a comprehensive analysis addressing the core research questions. The first section examines the global economy, international trade, and global supply chains, emphasizing their complex interrelationships. The second section focuses on the disruptions affecting global maritime logistics processes, analysing them through multiple analytical lenses. This research aims to construct a foundational framework to support decision-making and to serve as a key reference for scholars engaged in related domains. Its distinctiveness lies in its integrative approach, treating the global economy, trade, and supply chains as an interconnected system within the context of maritime logistics. The methodology outlined in Figure-1 was applied to answer the research question.

Figure 1. Research methodology for determining logistical strategies.

-Literature review; The literature review is systematically conducted under four key thematic headings: (1) the interdependence between the global economy, international trade and global supply chains; (2) maritime logistics as the backbone of global trade; (3) disruptions in maritime logistics; and (4) the impact of maritime disruptions on the global economy. To provide a comprehensive analysis, the review draws on a variety of academic and professional sources, including reports from leading organizations such as the WTO, IMO and the UN, peer-reviewed journal articles, books, industry policy papers and institutional publications. Both theoretical and empirical studies, as well as data-driven reports and case studies, are included to provide a multi-dimensional understanding of the complex interrelationships between maritime logistics and the global economic systems. The references cited in this study were selected from highly cited, high-impact factor articles published in journals specializing in maritime logistics, supply chains global economy and international trade with a focus on recent publications within the literature review. All sources were obtained through, online databases, institutional and official websites. In addition to that, data were also gathered from academic activities such as focus group discussions, colloquiums, and symposiums, which included participation from representatives and experts from various logistics-focused non-governmental organizations and stakeholder universities.

-Data Analysis: As detailed in the literature review section, the content of the study is created with the help of data collected from the scanned academic studies in the reference section. Based on insights from subject-matter experts, the study examined various strategies to mitigate maritime disruptions. These included diversifying shipping routes, exploring alternative ports, utilizing inland transportation, investing in digitalization and automation, enhancing port efficiency, and strengthening supplier relationships. The strategies are evaluated then based on their relative priority and impact.

-Scope and Limitations: Given the broad scope of the topic, which cannot be fully covered in this manuscript, this research specifically focuses on disruptions in maritime transportation, examining their consequences and exploring measures to mitigate these challenges. However, it should be emphasized that maritime transportation, as an integral component of intermodal and multimodal logistics systems, plays a pivotal role in global supply chains. Due to its interconnected nature, any disruption in maritime transport can trigger cascading effects across other modes of transportation, thereby undermining the efficiency and resilience of the overall logistics network.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Referee comments

I am glad to see that the authors have responded to all my previous questions and comments. Here are the questions I have on the revised manuscript.

The first comment is about the reference. There are some reference errors in the manuscript, “Error! Reference source not found”. Please check all the manuscript for reference and citation errors.
My next comment is about the Pairwise Comparison Matrix. First, who are the 32 maritime logistics experts. Are they from the academia or industry? Are they the service providers or shippers? Second, the resulting values in Table 3 are exactly integer. I doubt the preciseness.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have spent on reviewing our work a second time.

We have strengthened our work with your valuable insightful comments.

We have indicated each of your observations with the relevant page numbers.

Best Regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer III (Round 2)

Comment 1.

The first comment is about the reference. There are some reference errors in the manuscript, “Error! Reference source not found”. Please check all the manuscript for reference and citation errors.

Response 1.

All reference and citation errors identified in the manuscript were corrected. (line 804)

Comment 2.

My next comment is about the Pairwise Comparison Matrix. First, who are the 32 maritime logistics experts. Are they from the academia or industry? Are they the service providers or shippers?

Response 2.

(line 646)

The following paragraph, which provides detailed information about the identities of 32 maritime logistics experts and the institutions and organizations they belong to, has been added to the text.

The pairwise comparison matrices used in this study were developed based on evaluations provided by 32 experts in maritime logistics. All participants are senior professionals currently active in the logistics sector. These experts were selected from member companies affiliated with three major Turkish logistics associations:

The International Transporters Association (UND), representing over 1,000-member companies.
The Association of Logistics Service Providers (LojiDer), comprising 272 member companies and affiliated with the European Logistics Association (ELA).
UTIKAD (Association of International Forwarding and Logistics Service Providers), which includes 708 member companies.

From this combined pool of approximately 1,980 companies, 32 professionals with expertise in maritime logistics were identified and invited to contribute. Their backgrounds in international shipping, freight forwarding, and port operations ensure both the credibility and sectoral relevance of the collected evaluations.

In accordance with data protection regulations, the names of the participating companies, associations, and individual experts are not disclosed in the manuscript.

Comment 3.

the resulting values in Table 3 are exactly integer. I doubt the preciseness.

Response 3.

(line 664)

The section under the (5. Prioritization of The Strategies Based on the AHP Method) heading has been changed as follows and a matrix has been added as follows;

Prioritization of The Strategies Based on the AHP Method

…….

Table 3b shows the aggregated pairwise comparison matrix (Unrounded Geometric Means of 32 Experts), which was constructed by calculating the geometric mean of the corresponding entries from all 32 individual matrices. This method is widely used in Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) studies to synthesize group judgments while maintaining the reciprocal property of the matrix. The resulting matrix represents the consensus-based relative importance among the seven strategies, forming the foundation for subsequent normalization and priority weight calculations.

Table 3b Aggregated Pairwise Comparison Matrix (Unrounded Geometric Means of 32 Experts)

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1.0000	3.0021	4.0134	5.0487	5.1220	6.0001	6.0103
II	0.3332	1.0000	2.0112	3.0045	3.0310	3.9876	4.0054
III	0.2493	0.4973	1.0000	2.0012	2.0010	3.0124	3.0007
IV	0.1980	0.3328	0.4997	1.0000	1.9983	2.0023	2.0088
V	0.1954	0.3301	0.5003	0.5004	1.0000	2.0037	2.0009
VI	0.1667	0.2498	0.3329	0.4998	0.4990	1.0000	1.9985
VII	0.1665	0.2503	0.3331	0.4978	0.4991	0.5004	1.0000

Table 3c presents a rounded version of the aggregated pairwise comparison matrix shown previously in Table 3b. The values were rounded to the nearest standard value from Saaty's 1–9 fundamental scale to enhance readability and facilitate interpretation, especially in practice-oriented settings.While the unrounded matrix (Table 3b) was used for the actual normalization and weight derivation in line with AHP methodology, this simplified version offers a clearer visual reference for stakeholders less familiar with decimal-level comparisons.

Table 3c Aggregated Pairwise Comparison Matrix (Rounded Geometric Means of 32 Experts)

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1.0000	3.0000	4.0000	5.0000	5.0000	6.0000	6.0000
II	0.3333	1.0000	2.0000	3.0000	3.0000	4.0000	4.0000
III	0.2500	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000	3.0000	3.0000
IV	0.2000	0.3333	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000	2.0000
V	0.2000	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000	2.0000
VI	0.1667	0.2500	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000	2.0000
VII	0.1667	0.2500	0.3333	0.5000	0.5000	0.5000	1.0000

Each column of the aggregated pairwise comparison matrix in Table 3b is summed and showed in Table 4.

Table 4 displays the sum of each column from the aggregated pairwise comparison matrix. These totals are used to normalize the matrix by dividing each element in the matrix by its respective column total. This normalization process enables the calculation of relative priority weights for each criterion, which are essential for determining their final importance rankings within the AHP framework.

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for your improved work. It looks much better now.

Two small comments:

I would still be very happy, if you could shorten your chapters 3 and 4, and instead of long text, make a table with sufficient literature references. This would help the reader to follow your line of argument.
I still have one question: What is the source for the Figure 4?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have spent on reviewing our work a third time.

We have strengthened our work with your valuable insightful comments. We have indicated each of your observations with the relevant page numbers.

Best Regards

Authors.

Responses to Reviewer II (Round 2)

Comment 1.

I would still be very happy, if you could shorten your chapters 3 and 4, and instead of long text,

Response 1.

,allowing for the free exchange of goods, services, capital, and information. However, this interconnectedness also exposes the global economy to a variety of challenges. One of the most prominent is economic inequality, both within countries and between them. The gap between wealthy and developing nations remains a persistent issue, exacerbating poverty and creating instability. (Line 197)

Although challenges remain, international trade will continue to be a fundamental pillar of economic growth, fostering global collaboration, technological progress, and long-term prosperity. (Line 221)

Procurement involves sourcing and acquiring raw materials and semi-finished products to meet production demands. The production stage covers all activities involved in transforming these materials into finished goods, incorporating logistics at every step. Finally, distribution focuses on delivering completed products to end consumers through various channels. With the rapid advancement of technology, modern supply chain operations have grown increasingly intricate. The use of high-tech equipment—including large cargo ships, trucks, airplanes, cranes, and automated systems—alongside sophisticated tracking tools, software, and digital solutions, has revolutionized supply chain management. As a result, today’s supply chain processes span multiple disciplines, demanding specialized expertise and advanced technical skills to ensure seamless coordination and efficiency(Line 231)

These routes are vital for the movement of goods across continents, enabling economic exchange and supporting global trade. The primary shipping lanes are strategically positioned in regions with high maritime traffic density, linking major ports and key trade hubs worldwide. (Line 267)

Comment 2.

Make a table with sufficient literature references. This would help the reader to follow your line of argument.

Response 2.

Below table is inserted to the Manuscript (line 126);

Table 1 Summary of Key References Regarding Theme of the Research

Title / Theme	Main Findings / Opinion	References
Supply Chain Resilience - Conceptual Foundations	Defines resilience as the ability of the supply chain to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disruptions. Emphasizes system-wide coordination and adaptive capacity.	Christopher & Peck (2004), Sheffi (2005)
Redundancy and Flexibility in Maritime Logistics	Redundancy in routes and suppliers, as well as flexibility in operations, are shown to improve responsiveness under uncertainty.	Pettit et al. (2013), Ivanov (2020)
Disruption Typologies in Maritime Context	Distinguishes between natural, geopolitical, and operational disruptions affecting maritime supply chains.	Notteboom & Rodrigue (2021), Munim et al. (2021)
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Methodology	AHP is applied using Saaty’s scale for pairwise comparison. Experts rated the relative importance of seven resilience strategies.	Saaty (1980), Ho (2008)
Expert Judgment and Geometric Aggregation	32 maritime logistics experts’ evaluations were aggregated using geometric mean to construct a consensus matrix.	Forman & Peniwati (1998)
Normalization and Priority Vector Derivation	The normalized matrices yield priority weights for each strategy, ensuring consistency ratios are within acceptable thresholds.	Saaty (1980)
Simulation-based Evaluation of Strategic Robustness	Simulation allows for testing strategy effectiveness under different disruption scenarios. Enhances empirical validation of AHP rankings.	Berman & Kim (2018), Wang et al. (2022)
Closed-loop Feedback Mechanism	Real-time data and performance metrics enable iterative improvements and dynamic adjustment of resilience strategies.	Ivanov & Dolgui (2020), Sheffi (2007)
Original Contribution: Integrated AHP-Simulation Model	Combines expert judgment (AHP) with scenario simulation to provide a robust multi-method framework for resilience strategy evaluation.	Developed by Authors
Policy and Managerial Implications	Recommends prioritizing route diversification, cyber-resilience, and redundancy investments for maritime firms and policymakers.	Synthesized by Authors based on empirical findings

Comment 3.

I still have one question: What is the source for the Figure 4?

Response 3.

Thank you for your question regarding Figure 4. We would like to clarify that Figure 4 represents a methodological framework developed originally by the authors as part of this research. It is not directly taken from any external source, although its components are informed by relevant literature discussed in Chapters 3 and 4. In the revised manuscript, we have now explicitly stated in the figure caption and the text that this methodology was developed by the authors. But to clarify the source issue we added an explanation as shown below in parantesis. (line 475);

Figure 4. The Methodology for Diversifying Shipping Routes. (Figure is developed by the authors to be informed by the relevant literature discussed in Chapters 3 and 4.)

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is glad to see that the authors have responded to all my comments. I have no more questions on the revised version.

Author Response

Thanks for your contributions.

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1	3	4	5	5	5	6
II	1/3	1	2	3	3	3	4
III	1/4	1/2	1	2	2	2	3
IV	1/6	1/6	1/4	1	1	2	2
V	1/6	1/6	1/3	1/2	1	2	2
VI	1/6	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	1
VII	1/6	1/6	1/2	1/2	1/2	1	1

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1	3	4	5	5	5	6
II	1/3	1	2	3	3	3	4
III	1/4	1/2	1	2	2	2	3
IV	1/6	1/6	1/4	1	1	2	2
V	1/6	1/6	1/3	1/2	1	2	2
VI	1/6	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	1
VII	1/6	1/6	1/2	1/2	1/2	1	1

	I	II	III	III	IV	V	VI
I	1	3	4	5	5	5	6
II	1/3	1	2	3	3	3	4
III	1/4	1/2	1	2	2	2	3
IV	1/6	1/6	1/4	1	1	2	2
V	1/6	1/6	1/3	1/2	1	2	2
VI	1/6	1/6	1/4	1/3	1/2	1	1
VII	1/6	1/6	1/2	1/2	1/2	1	1