Evaluation of Sustainable Rural Tourism. The Case of Uzundere District, Erzurum, Turkey^†

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The work presented is interesting even if the subject is not original. It analyses the possibilities of implementing a sustainable rural tourism in Uzundere District, Erzurum, Turkey.

It is well structured and the presentation of information and results is clear.

The research questions are consistent and the methodology, through the use of Delphi analysis, is adequate.

The analysis carried out on the study area is also sufficient.

The conclusions formulated are based on the results obtained, although they would be more complete with further discussion of the results achieved.

The bibliography used is sufficient but its use in the Introduction is very descriptive and cumulative. A more critical analysis of it is missing.

There are issues that need to be improved, especially those related to the discussion of the results. This aspect is dealt with in little depth. They should be compared with other case studies from similar and diverse territories to the one analysed. There is a large amount of bibliography available on this subject, for example, in this same Sustainability journal.

Some examples:

Grounding Sustainable Tourism in Science—A Geographic Approach. Fabien Bourlon, Trace Gale, Andrés Adiego, Valentina Álvarez-Barra and Alexandra Salazar. Sustainability 2021, 13(13), 7455

Ramona Ciolac, Tiberiu Iancu, Ioan Brad, Gabriela Popescu, Diana Marin and Tabita Adamov Agritourism Activity—A “Smart Chance” for Mountain Rural Environment’s Sustainability, Sustainability 2020, 12(15), 6237;

Angelo Belliggiano, Eugenio Cejudo Garcia, Marilena Labianca, Francisco Navarro Valverde and Stefano De Rubertis The “Eco-Effectiveness” of Agritourism Dynamics in Italy and Spain: A Tool for Evaluating Regional Sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12(17), 7080;

Author Response

Date: 20/08/2021

Subject: Response to reviewer

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1306264

 

Dear Reviewers ,

 

I wish to submit the revised manuscript entitled “Evaluation of Sustainable Rural Tourism. The Case of Uzundere District, Erzurum, Turkey” to “ (ISSN 2071-1050)”. The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewer(s) for their constructive and valuable comments and suggestions. The revised manuscript is provided in a separate file.

 

• In order to complete the abstract topics, new findings of the study were added to this section in Yelloew color font. The part has been moved

 

• Six new articles from this sustainability journal were used to compare other cases from similar and diverse areas. New added part is in Yelloew color font. Gray color font part has been moved.

 

• As dear Reviewer recommend we added a new Literature Review section to add critical, concise, and topic-based content to our research. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• A new paragraph was added to the results section, explaining how this study is noble and different from other studies, and highlighting the importance of the findings in the literature. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• The maps in Figure 1 were redrawn and merged with Figure 4.

 

Thank you for evaluating the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The maps in Figure 1 have low resolution. It needs to be changed.

Author Response

Date: 20/08/2021

Subject: Response to reviewer

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1306264

 

Dear Reviewers ,

 

I wish to submit the revised manuscript entitled “Evaluation of Sustainable Rural Tourism. The Case of Uzundere District, Erzurum, Turkey” to “ (ISSN 2071-1050)”. The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewer(s) for their constructive and valuable comments and suggestions. The revised manuscript is provided in a separate file.

 

• In order to complete the abstract topics, new findings of the study were added to this section in Yelloew color font. The part has been moved

 

• Six new articles from this sustainability journal were used to compare other cases from similar and diverse areas. New added part is in Yelloew color font. Gray color font part has been moved.

 

• As dear Reviewer recommend we added a new Literature Review section to add critical, concise, and topic-based content to our research. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• A new paragraph was added to the results section, explaining how this study is noble and different from other studies, and highlighting the importance of the findings in the literature. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• The maps in Figure 1 were redrawn and merged with Figure 4.

 

Thank you for evaluating the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear author/authors,
In my opinion the theme of the article is very actual and interesting for the readers of the journal.
The presented paper is clearly written and well structured.
Here are some minor suggestions for improvement:
-Abstract: should provide some interesting findings of the study. It should be concise and appealing. Please be more specific regarding contribution of the paper and add scientific contribution in abstract.
-Introduction: needs to be more convincing. This is the most important section of the manuscript that sets the scene and especially the context of the study. The introduction must end with a statement of the research goals of the current study, showing their contribution with respect to the problems identified by the literature review.
-Literature Review: The main problem is in the literature review. This section should not mere include the various studies. Literature Review must be critical, succinct and theme based. Part of the Literature review can be found in the Introduction section. That is why we recommend the author/authors to introduce a new Literature Review section.
-Research Results: Researcher/s should justify how this study is noble and different from other studies.
- Discussions and Conclusions: The implications of the study are written in a very sketchy manner. It does not provide a clear theoretical and managerial positioning of your research. Researcher/s need to demonstrate how the generated data differs from previous studies, and also need to reinforce their contributions by stating more explicitly why their findings make significant contribution to the literature. 

Author Response

Date: 20/08/2021

Subject: Response to reviewer

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1306264

 

Dear Reviewers ,

 

I wish to submit the revised manuscript entitled “Evaluation of Sustainable Rural Tourism. The Case of Uzundere District, Erzurum, Turkey” to “ (ISSN 2071-1050)”. The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewer(s) for their constructive and valuable comments and suggestions. The revised manuscript is provided in a separate file.

 

• In order to complete the abstract topics, new findings of the study were added to this section in Yelloew color font. The part has been moved

 

• Six new articles from this sustainability journal were used to compare other cases from similar and diverse areas. New added part is in Yelloew color font. Gray color font part has been moved.

 

• As dear Reviewer recommend we added a new Literature Review section to add critical, concise, and topic-based content to our research. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• A new paragraph was added to the results section, explaining how this study is noble and different from other studies, and highlighting the importance of the findings in the literature. New added part is in Yelloew color font.

 

• The maps in Figure 1 were redrawn and merged with Figure 4.

 

Thank you for evaluating the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The corrections made have improved the work presented. They have made it more solid and consistent.
Most of the corrections raised have been made.
Minor corrections should be made in relation to the new incorporated bilbioblography as it is misquoted, referenced and incomplete:

• In the case of "ÖZGERİŞ & KARAHAN", the year of publication is missing in the citation and the use of capital letters in both the citation and the reference is incorrect.
• In the case of: "Belliggiano, A., Garcia, EC, Labianca, M., Valverde, FN, & De Rubertis, S" the correct way of citing and referencing is: Belliggiano, A., Cejudo Garcia, E ., Labianca, M., Navarro Valverde, F., & De Rubertis, S.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer ,

- Proposed corrections were made to the newly included biobiography.

 

Thank you for evaluating the revised manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf