Strategy for the Development of Cartography in Bulgaria with a 10-Year Planning Horizon (2025–2035) in the Context of Industry 4.0 and 5.0

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

With regard to the manuscript entitled “Strategy for the Development of Cartography in Bulgaria with a 10-Year Planning Horizon (2025–2035) in the Context of Industry 4.0 and 5.0”, which will be considered for publication in ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, I include the following specific comments in support of the recommendation “accept”:

The main question addressed by the study is how to modernize the cartographic sector in Bulgaria, adapting it to the digital transformation and future trends of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0. The vision is to build a human-centric, data-driven system, aligned with global standards, which is crucial for the sustainable development of the sector, so that the country can meet the standards of developed countries in the field of geosciences.

The topic is relevant in the field, as Bulgaria lags behind in the development of the sector due to the outdated regulatory framework, the insufficient use of modern technologies, and the lack of funding.

A SWOT analysis was performed that clearly highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of the current state of the sector, emphasizing the need for strategic action for its advancement. The authors propose step-by-step specific measures for the modernization and standardization of cartographic activity in Bulgaria.

These measures will contribute to increasing the efficiency and quality of cartographic production and its synchronization with European and international standards, ensuring high-quality geographic data accessible to state institutions, the private sector and citizens.

The conclusions in section three are consistent with the evidence and arguments presented in the paper and they accurately reflect the main question posed. The references are appropriate.

In addition, I further declare that the aforesaid is my personal opinion. I don’t know the authors and I have no personal interest in publishing this paper.

Author Response

We are very grateful to the reviewer for his time and review. The document and every opinion is extremely important for Bulgarian cartographers and GEO-scientists. Thus, we can give the right path to our state organizations and responsible persons to assign and fulfill the tasks set out in the Strategy for the Development of Cartography in Bulgaria.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This strategic document presents a comprehensive roadmap for modernizing Bulgaria's cartographic sector within the Industry 4.0/5.0 framework. The document demonstrates a solid understanding of contemporary geospatial technologies and international standards, providing a structured approach to cartographic development over the next decade. The document provides a solid foundation for Bulgarian cartographic modernization. The technical vision is sound and aligns well with international best practices. With enhanced detail on implementation mechanisms and resource requirements, this strategy could serve as an effective roadmap for the sector's development.

 

It can be accepted as is with a minor correction. On page 12, line 579, the heading "4. Patents" is empty and needs to be deleted.

Author Response

We are very grateful to the reviewer for his time and review. The document and every opinion is extremely important for Bulgarian cartographers and GEO-scientists. Thus, we can give the right path to our state organizations and responsible persons to assign and fulfill the tasks set out in the Strategy for the Development of Cartography in Bulgaria.

Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

Comments 1: It can be accepted as is with a minor correction. On page 12, line 579, the heading "4. Patents" is empty and needs to be deleted.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. We deleted “4. Paterns”.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments to be returned to author(s)

 

This manuscript outlines a strategic framework for the development of cartography in Bulgaria at a national level, with a focus on a 10-year planning horizon that is aligned with Industry 4.0 and 5.0 developments. However, based on the comments below, there are still some issues that need to be addressed:

1. Is there a specific reason for considering a 10-year planning horizon for strategy development in the context of Industry 4.0 and 5.0? Technology is evolving so swiftly that today's technology quickly becomes outdated. In this case, planning for 10 years may not be beneficial in the long term.
2. The manuscript addresses a wide range of issues, but some key concepts — such as the difference between Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 — should be clearly and briefly defined earlier in the text. This would help readers who are unfamiliar with these terms to follow the discussion more easily. The scope and terminology must be clarified.
3. The quality of the paper could be enhanced by adding a framework diagram for strategy development, as this would show the complete strategy in one place.
4. While the manuscript addresses a wide range of issues, some key concepts — such as the difference between Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 — should be clearly and briefly defined earlier in the text. This would help readers who are unfamiliar with these terms to follow the discussion more easily.
5. The research gap/problem is not explicitly described in this abstract and should be clearly defined.
6. The key findings and elements of the strategy must be written concisely and clearly in the abstract.
7. On line 46, in section 1.1.1, 'Modernization of geodetic and cartographic systems'. The terms 'geodetic' and 'cartography' must be properly defined here, as they are important terminology for this paper.
8. In lines 74–75, it is mentioned that 'adaptation to ISO 19100 is not just a technical decision, but a strategic one'. Provide a brief justification/explanation of how this is linked to strategic decisions.
9. Please cite the text in lines 78–80 with the following reference: 'Collaboration between institutions and the private sector is essential to enable large-scale national projects, such as the construction of a National Geospatial Data Infrastructure, to be completed with private financing'.
10. Please cite the text in lines 112–114 with the correct references: 'Environmentally conscious mapping will include the use of energy-efficient satellites and carefully planned spatial data collection to avoid unnecessary intrusion into private territories'.
11. Please cite the text in lines 119–121 with the proper references: “New professional fields will emerge, such as 'AI geoanalyst', 'digital cartographer-ethicist', and 'XR cartography specialist', combining traditional cartographic knowledge with modern technologies”.
12. The approach/methodology is not clearly described in the abstract. The development approach mentioned in lines 140–143 should be described here: 'The strategy was developed in accordance with the national methodology for strategic planning and through preliminary consultations with stakeholders, including research institutions, business organizations, and public institutions.'
13. As mentioned in lines 186–187, AGCC is responsible for the core activities of geodesy and cartography. Please explain why AGCC should take this responsibility.
14. In section 2.6 of 'Strategic Goals', the estimated timeframe for each goal is mentioned. What is the basis for these timelines? While the strategic goals are presented alongside their timeframes and indicators, including summary tables or diagrams in the section would improve it. These visuals would clarify the strategic priorities, institutional responsibilities and timelines, making the content more accessible, particularly for policymakers and stakeholders without an academic background.
15. In section 2.8.2, the estimated timeframe for each measure is mentioned. What is the basis for these timelines? Please could you explain that these estimated timelines are based on a formula?
16. In conclusion, on line 569, you mention the key principle of development, which is 'development of standards for geospatial data and cartographic product exchange'. In Appendix A, you provide a list of standards for cartography and geospatial data. Please clarify whether these standards already exist or need improvement.

Author Response

Please see the attached file. Thank you very much for your valuable comments and taking the time to review our manuscript!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx