Blue Circular Economy—Reuse and Valorization of Bivalve Shells: The Case of Algarve, Portugal

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The Authors presente a well written Article, with interesting topic and insights. 

There are just few suggestions: 

22-24 rewrite, not clear

76-82, if possible, give some percentage, it would be helpful to clarify what "significant contributors" means.

intro: I would add just a couple of lines to explain deeper why and how bivalves waste cause pollution.  

118 an economic

233-235 might be a typing error, please check the sentence. 

Figure 5: error on the spelling of Pharmaceutical, L missing

Author Response

Authors - we sincerely thank you for your invaluable contributions; they were immensely appreciated. The unclear passages have been rewritten. Additionally, the word "contributors" has been corrected, and relevant percentages have been added to enhance the work. Furthermore, we have elucidated more clearly why waste causes pollution. We have explained the economic aspects better and expanded upon future developments. Moreover, a spelling error in a figure has been rectified for accuracy.

Thank you once again for your invaluable input.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Your manuscriptit looks much better and well structured. The exploration of this sustainable practice not only addresses environmental concerns but also highlights the potential economic and sociocultural benefits of such valorization efforts. To further strengthen your study, it would be beneficial to delve deeper into the local cultural practices surrounding bivalve consumption and waste management. This could provide richer insights into stakeholder behaviors and potential barriers to shell valorization. Additionally, expanding the scope of potential reuse applications beyond nursery soils to include other industries could underscore the versatility of bivalve shells as a resource. Enhancing the economic analysis with detailed cost-benefit assessments, addressing the challenges of intermediary waste generation more explicitly, and elucidating the role of technology and innovation in enabling circular valorization practices could also offer valuable perspectives. Furthermore, discussing the implications of existing policy frameworks and suggesting future research directions would greatly contribute to the manuscript's depth and impact.

By integrating these suggestions, your work can serve as a more comprehensive guide for leveraging bivalve shell waste, inspiring broader stakeholder engagement, and informing policy adjustments conducive to circular economy practices. Your study undeniably makes a significant contribution to the field, and these enhancements could further illuminate the path towards a sustainable and circular valorization of marine resources.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Authors – we extend our sincere gratitude for your invaluable contributions; they were immensely appreciated.

We delved deeper into cultural practices involving the use of oysters. Additionally, difficulties in reusing this waste were highlighted. Various sectors that can repurpose this waste and transform it into new products were added. The discussion and conclusion addressed the challenges of waste generation and our future developments, which will involve a more detailed analysis of cost-benefit and business models. Public policies' role and importance in this work was elucidated more clearly.

Thank you once again for your invaluable input.

Reviewer 3 Report

Title: Blue Circular Economy - Reuse and Valorization of Bivalve Shells: The Case of Algarve, Portugal

Paper Review:

Comments: The paper exhibits a promising trajectory in its initial phase, engaging with an intriguing topic that particularly captivates individuals well-versed in circular economy, albeit less acquainted with the intricacies of bivalve shell reuse. The innovative approach to reuse within the context of the Blue Circular Economy is commendable and adds a unique perspective to the discourse.

While I commend the paper's merits, I believe there is space for improvement before considering finalization and publication. The rarity of the topic's originality is acknowledged and appreciated, making it a pleasure to read.

To enhance the paper's structure, I propose a more comprehensive introductory section that incorporates a literature review, particularly focusing on the intersection of "Blue Circular" and circular economy in a broader context. Establishing stronger connections between these concepts will contribute to a more robust foundation for the paper.

The clarity of the methodology is commendable, yet the absence of a detailed description of the survey in Stage II (lines 150-155) is a notable gap. Providing additional information on the survey methodology will enhance the paper's methodological rigor.

A critical point is about page 4 (lines 161-163) regarding the consistency of the proposed questions. Have you used the same question for the different kind of interview? If variations exist, it could pose a significant challenge to the overall validity of the work. Careful examination and clarification of this aspect are crucial.

While the suggestion to condense the stages into a single discursive paragraph is valid, further elaboration on the rationale behind this recommendation would strengthen the feedback.

In the subsequent sections, the discussion is commendable up to 3.3. However, a seamless connection appears to be missing, prompting reflection on the text's organization. Splitting the content into two paragraphs with more comprehensive introductions may address this issue and improve overall coherence.

Figure 5 stands out as a focal point of the discussion, displaying excellence in visual representation. The effectiveness of this figure adds significant value to the paper.

The SWOT analysis is well-executed, but its integration into the methodology section, along with proper references, would enhance the paper's academic robustness.

An effective conclusion is a crucial element missing from the paper, along with a discussion of research limitations and potential future developments. Incorporating these components will contribute to a more well-rounded and conclusive manuscript.

In summary, despite initial expectations of a nonsensical paper, the work proved to be intriguing and holds the potential for successful publication with further refinement. Addressing the outlined suggestions will undoubtedly contribute to the overall quality and impact of the paper.


Considering english: I'm not a native speaker... I think that it is a good level but it is better to have a native speaker opinion.

Author Response

Authors – we sincerely thank you for your invaluable contributions; they were immensely appreciated.

The introduction has been enhanced to improve the integration of the circular economy and blue circular economy. Stages II and III have been refined with relevant information for the work, thus providing a better explanation of the coherence of the questions. In point 3.3, some important information was missing, which has now been provided, along with the SWOT analysis, which has been better introduced into the methodology. Finally, the article has been reviewed by a proficient English language expert.

Thank you once again for your invaluable input.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

You have accomplished a huge amount of comments.
There is only one missing: in my idea you have to stress more the Future Research and Limitations of the work.

After that the paper will be ready for publication.

It was a pleasure, very good work.

Best

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your contribution. We have enhanced the emphasis on the subject and clarified the limitations encountered throughout this work.

Once again, thank you for your invaluable input.