Spatiotemporal Evolution of Tourism Eco-Efficiency in Major Tourist Cities in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
Thank you for your invitation and I'm proud to have the chance to review the paper before it's published.
The manuscript entitled "Spatiotemporal evolution of tourism eco-efficiency in major tourist cities in China" is exciting and up-to-date.
The paper presented deals with a fascinating and important topic from the tourism industry's point of view. It needs to be treated as a critical voice in the discussion, the proposed holistic approach is particularly valuable to the raised issue.
It is well-organized research with theoretical background, methodology, and analysis. The research was done in detail, following all methodological procedures. The research methodology and application of appropriate statistical techniques are all adequate for the study.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your careful review. Considering the reviewer's suggestions, we reconstructed the discussion in a critical tone and added dialogue with previous studies to discuss the differences in findings and the reasons behind them. It can be found on, Line 484-497, Line 511-514, and Line 517-524, page16-17; it can also be found on Line 550-553 and Line 570-574, page18.
Best regards
Doc. Muhtar P.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
The manuscript presents the results of interesting studies that were carried out in accordance with the prepared methodology. Figures and tables are properly prepared.
In my opinion, slight adjustments can be made.
Remarks:
1. The purpose of the manuscript is not clearly stated. However, in a research paper the purpose of the manuscript should be more precisely indicated.
2. No research hypotheses / research questions were formulated.
3. The presentation of the relationship between the theory and research results is insufficient. It is very important in order to raise the scientific level of the manuscript.
In conclusion, congratulations on yours interesting manuscript.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your careful review and good comments. Please find the description for revision below.
Comment 1:
The purpose of the manuscript is not clearly stated. However, in a research paper the purpose of the manuscript should be more precisely indicated.
Response 1:
Thank you for your careful review and good comments. We have studied the comments carefully and have made corrections, which we hope meet with approval.
According to comment 1, the purpose of the manuscript was clearly stated and explained from the theoretical and practical significance, It can be found on Line 133-136, page 3. Besides, the research purpose was clearly stated in the abstract, which can be found on Line 12-13, page 1.
Comment 2:
No research hypotheses / research questions were formulated.
Response 2:
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. The research questions were added in the introduction section. It can be found on Line118-123, page 3.
Comment 3:
The presentation of the relationship between the theory and research results is insufficient. It is very important in order to raise the scientific level of the manuscript.
Response 3:
Thank you for your kind advice. We have strived to expand the expression of the relationship between theory and research results, It can be found on Line 491-495, Line 511-514, and Line 517-524, page 16-17; And on Line 570-574, page 18.
Best regards
Dc. Muhtar P.
Reviewer 3 Report
First of all I would like to warmly congratulate the authors of this interesting and courageous article. They have posed an important challenge in the framework of sustainable local development based on eco-efficiency policies. The article is brave because it analyzes the bottom-up and top-down situation, and after a thorough review of the models, it opts for a supermodel that offers a very broad perspective, being able to carry out discussion and very well-supported critical-constructive conclusions.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your careful review and good comments. Considering the reviewer's suggestions, we reconstructed the discussion and added dialogue with previous studies to discuss the differences in findings and the reasons behind them. It can be found on, Line 484-497, Line 511-514, and Line 517-524, page16-17; it can also be found on Line 550-553 and Line 570-574, page18.
According to the comments, we have also improved the conclusion by adding critical-constructive content. It can be found on Line 588-597, page 18; and on Line 610-622, page 19.
Best regards
Dc. Muhtar P.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
unfortunately, I do not see the research question " on Line118-123, page 3."
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you very much for your careful review and kind reminder. We apologize for our negligence in elaborating on the research questions. The research questions were added in the introduction section. It can be found on Line124-126, page 3.
Sincerely,
P Muhtar
