Claims Solutions Using a Blockchain System in International Logistics
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I cannot say I learned a lot from that paper. First, I would add at least a few lines about BLOCKCHAIN. The authors spent pages to list advantages to use that method but they might recall some theoretical aspects.
Everything in the paper seems so general. As regards to game theory and the use of that branch in logistics, the authors wirte: "expects answered that they use strategies... and try to predict people's behavior, even though the theory itself is not known to them" Is it a proof that they use game theory? If so, I would say that everyone uses game theory in their daily life. Everyone makes choices (strategies) and gets some kind of payoff as a result of their choices.
As an expert in game theory, I cannot say, the paper clearly describes any connection between logistics and game theory. The same concerns statistics methods. There is no specific tools mentioned in the paper. In this way, without details I would say, for example, that financial institutes use game theory and statistical methods (perhaps, without being aware of using it). I suggest, the authors should specify the methods.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the manuscript (ID: sustainability-1120170) with the title: „Claims Solutions Using Mathematical Analysis and Blockchain System in International Logistics “. We have tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made many changes in the manuscript according to your helpful comments.
Point 1. First, I would add at least a few lines about BLOCKCHAIN. The authors spent pages to list advantages to use that method but they might recall some theoretical aspects.
Response: Thank you for this comment. Yes, we added a definition of Blockchain in lines 65-69:
„Blockchain is an important technology for records management professionals to understand because it has broad implications for securing and authenticating intellectual property at lower cost and higher efficiency. The Blockchain is a distributed database of records of all transactions or digital event that have been executed and shared among participating parties.”
Point 2. Everything in the paper seems so general. As regards to game theory and the use of that branch in logistics, the authors wirte: "expects answered that they use strategies... and try to predict people's behavior, even though the theory itself is not known to them" Is it a proof that they use game theory? If so, I would say that everyone uses game theory in their daily life. Everyone makes choices (strategies) and gets some kind of payoff as a result of their choices.
Response: Thank you for this comment. The manuscript has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments. The manuscript now includes a clearer explanation of how to use the synthesis of the Blockchain system with Game Theory and statistical methods.
Point 3. As an expert in game theory, I cannot say, the paper clearly describes any connection between logistics and game theory. The same concerns statistics methods. There is no specific tools mentioned in the paper. In this way, without details I would say, for example, that financial institutes use game theory and statistical methods (perhaps, without being aware of using it). I suggest, the authors should specify the methods.
Response: Thank you for this comment. This section has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments. The article now mentions specific tools in Game Theory, such as a win-win game. The method of game theory is presented in lines 274-312.
We would like to thank you for your constructive help once again.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Identify the types of claims that you intend to discuss early in the paper: freight damage claims, for example. The plain term 'claims' left me wondering for a while exactly what you meant. I figured it out, but that means I was wondering for a while.
A good paper on an often neglected subject.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the manuscript (ID: sustainability-1120170) with the title: „Claims Solutions Using Mathematical Analysis and Blockchain System in International Logistics “. We have tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made many changes in the manuscript according to your helpful comments.
Point 1. Identify the types of claims that you intend to discuss early in the paper: freight damage claims, for example. The plain term 'claims' left me wondering for a while exactly what you meant. I figured it out, but that means I was wondering for a while.
Response: Thank you for this comment. The manuscript has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments.
Point 2. A good paper on an often neglected subject.
Response: Thanks for the good evaluation. Nice for us.
We would like to thank you for your constructive help once again.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The review report is given in the attached document.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the manuscript (ID: sustainability-1120170) with the title: „Claims Solutions Using Mathematical Analysis and Blockchain System in International Logistics “. We have tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made many changes in the manuscript according to your helpful comments.
Point 1. Among other shortcomings I consider:
Change the title of the article - does not correspond to the content of the article.
Response: Thank you for this comment. We changed the title of the article. We've shortened it, it now looks like this:
CLAIMS SOLUTIONS USING BLOCKCHAIN SYSTEM IN INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS
Point 2. In the introduction, the authors should approach the generally researched issues. They have
to define the research problem on which the article is focused. At present, there is something
different in each paragraph in the introduction - they do not follow the information on each
other.
Response: Thank you. The manuscript has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments.
Point 3. In literature review they should examine comparative issues, define specific terms, compare
the opinions of authors, studies and research:
o it is necessary to define customer service in logistics,
o it is necessary to state research and studies of claims in logistics,
o it is necessary to define how the blockchain is related to claims in logistics,
o it is necessary to define a blockchain in logistics.
Response: Thank you for this comment. The manuscript has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments.
Point 4. Materials and Methods - the chapter is not processed correctly:
o The aim of the paper (lines 97-102) is very general. I recommend moving it to the chapter
Material and Methods.
Response: Thank you for this comment. This section has been corrected based on your comments. The aim of the paper is rewritten. It is presented in lines 99-105. It now looks like this:
“The aim of this article is two-fold: First, to identify the potential Blockchain benefits and application scenarios for and in international logistics for solving claims, thus providing not only a theoretical basis for Blockchain technology, but also synthesizing and highlighting real application possibilities. Second, to present the application possibilities of the Blockchain system together with Game Theory and statistical methods, to find out whether these methods can interact with each other and whether the synthesis of such tools is promising in solving claims in international freight transport.”
Point 5. The hypotheses (lines 344-347) are incorrect. The hypothesis is not one general sentence. A
hypothesis is a statement that has alternatives and is based on research or literature review.
Response: Thank you for this comment. The hypotheses in the manuscript are now gone. During the study, we will try to answer two specific questions:
- What are the possibilities of applying Blockchain technology in international logistics, resolving customer claims?
- Is it possible to link Blockchain technology to game theory and the use of statistical methods in international logistics?
Point 6. The authors used 16 questionnaires. This sample is unreliable to determine specific
conclusions and recommendations for the researched issue. Determining on the basis of 16
questionnaires from Lithuania how the blockchain works is a very bold step, because such a
small sample cannot be interpreted by means of statistical indicators. The sample of 16
respondents is suitable for expert interviews and not as a questionnaire. A credible sample is at
least 50 or more respondents to the questionnaire.
Response: Thank you for this comment. Our study did not involve ordinary employees of transport and logistics companies, but managers and executives of the largest international companies, i.e. experts. Requirements were set for these experts: higher education required, work experience in a transport or logistics company - at least 8 years, as well as experience in management positions.
Unfortunately, we are unable to re-conduct the survey at this time.
Point 7. Results are chaotically processed. The results only show graphs, but the specific comments
and justifications are short. I do not know where the authors evaluated the established
hypotheses. In the article, I did not find an evaluation and subsequent further analysis of the
established hypotheses (hypotheses specified in lines 344-347). I also did not find any
mathematical analysis in the article, as stated in the title of the article.
Response: Thank you for this comment. This section has been redesigned and completely redesigned. Since we rejected the hypotheses, there was no need to prove them. In mathematical analysis, we called Game Theory and Statistical Methods.
Point 8. Discussion is very general. The authors do not give concrete results or talk about what needs
to be changed at the level of companies and the state in order to further develop the researched
issue.
Response: Thank you for this comment. This section has been very carefully reviewed and corrected based on your comments.
Point 9. Conclusions is very general. The authors do not talk about a vision for the future about other
possibilities, they do not compare with other countries, and they do not make any specific
recommendations based on numerical values (percentages, shares, average values).
References are processed incorrectly. The authors did not follow the journal template that is
intended to process the article. For one source, the year is for the other source, the year is not
specified (source 6 - the year of publication is not specified). 90% of resources are Internet
resources which is not suitable for a scientific article. I recommend the authors to carry out a
comprehensive literary research and to process the theoretical part on the basis of professional
articles from journals, conferences, books and professional studies.
Response: Thank you for these comments. This section has been redesigned and completely redesigned. We redesigned the references, arranged them according to requirements. We also added additional literature sources.
Point 10. The article must be fundamentally reworked so that it meets all the requirements of the
scientific article:
- Clearly prepare the literature review, which will follow each other.
- Clearly elaborate the methodology and determine the specific objectives of the article.
- Develop mathematical methods - the authors in the title of the article talk about mathematical
methods, but in the article their use is at least.
- Develop and clarify the results of the article.
- Compare the results with other countries in the world / surveys / studies and determine the
future direction of the researched issue.
- Design and identify concrete solutions within Lithuania.
- Use quality resources, scientific contributions, scientific conferences, research studies
in references.
Response: Thank you for these constructive suggestions. The article has been substantially revised based on your suggestions.
We would like to thank you for your constructive help once again.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors significantly improved their paper. I have no comments to the manuscript and I would recommend it for publication.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the manuscript (ID: sustainability-1120170) with the title: „Claims Solutions Using Blockchain System in International Logistics “.
Point 1. English language and style are fine/minor spell check required.
Response: Thank you. We work to review and correct grammatical and stylistic errors.
Point 2. The authors significantly improved their paper. I have no comments to the manuscript and I would recommend it for publication.
Response: Thank you. We have tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made many changes in the manuscript according to your helpful comments. We would like to thank you for your constructive help once again.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The abstract does not contain specific numerical values to which the authors have worked. Also, specific numerical values are also missing in the conclusion and discussion. The authors write in the article that they used statistical methods, but their use in the article is minimal. The aim of the article cannot be double. The aim of the article is always the main aim and secondary objectives. The authors did not divide the aim into main and secondary objectives. The sample of respondents to the questionnaire is not credible, I would rather interpret it as research interviews.
The article is not completely edited according to the reviewer's instructions. The authors have edited / corrected several comments, but not all.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your valuable comments on the manuscript (ID: sustainability-1120170) with the title: „Claims Solutions Using Blockchain System in International Logistics “. We have tried our best to revise and improve the manuscript and made many changes in the manuscript according to your helpful comments.
Point 1. The abstract does not contain specific numerical values to which the authors have worked. Also, specific numerical values are also missing in the conclusion and discussion.
Response: Thank you. The abstract has been corrected based on your comments. It has also been very carefully reviewed and corrected in the conclusions and discussions. Numeric values are inserted in lines 541-552, in lines 611-620, 672-675 and in lines 689-698.
Point 2. The authors write in the article that they used statistical methods, but their use in the article is minimal.
Response: Thank you. Information on statistical methods has now been streamlined and supplemented. This is seen in lines 341-344 and also presented in the Discussion and Conclusions sections.
Point 3. The aim of the article cannot be double. The aim of the article is always the main aim and secondary objectives. The authors did not divide the aim into main and secondary objectives.
Response: Thank you for this constructive comment. The aim of the paper is rewritten. It is presented in lines 101-107. It now looks like this:
“The aim of this article is to present the possibilities of applying the Blockchain system together with Game theory and statistical methods, to find out whether these methods can interact with each other and whether the synthesis of such tools is promising in solving claims in international freight transport. To achieve this goal, possible scenarios of Blockchain application for and in international logistics for solving claims are identified, thus providing not only a theoretical basis for Blockchain technology, but also synthesizing and highlighting real application possibilities.”
Point 4. The sample of respondents to the questionnaire is not credible, I would rather interpret it as research interviews.
Response: Thank you for this constructive proposal. The section Material Methods has been corrected based on your comments (in lines 350-353, 365-425). Results and Conclusions have also been adjusted.
Point 5. The article is not completely edited according to the reviewer's instructions. The authors have edited / corrected several comments, but not all.
Response: Thank you for this comment. At this stage, we tried to take more corrections and adjusted more points. We would like to thank you for your constructive help once again.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
