Environmental Sustainability and Territorial Competitiveness: A Comparison between Italian Provinces

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

I consider the research carried out interesting and well structured. I recommend to:

- insert in the introductory parts some references to international sustainability protocols (further improvement of the analysis could be to analyze whether the various cities have used them)

- add the definition of all the factors included in the formula used.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I appreciate your guidance. I proceeded to modify the text with your indications.

Thanks for everything. Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript must be rewritten, with extensive editing of the English as well as conceptual rewording.  

The literature was adequately engaged and discussed but that discussion is often confusing, in large part because of language issues.  Citations are relevant and adequate.

The analysis of results could be reworked.  Conclusions of correlation will be countered by many.  However, the discussion of regional blocs could and should be expanded, even within the early conceptual  sections.  A GIS map could easily supplement the manuscript and make the regional bloc conclusion easier to understand and discuss.  

The idea is a great one.  The manuscript and the study are good and should be published but needs to be rewritten and resubmitted to be publishable, in my opinion.  

See above. The quality of English detracts from all aspects of the manuscript, including conceptually.  

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I appreciate your guidance. I then changed the text in accordance with your suggestions. In particular, I've revised the conclusions and expanded and rephrased the presentation of the results. I also made an effort to make my English better.

Thanks for everything. Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The Article discusses the importance of sustainability in the context of the worsening climate change issue. It highlights the need for sustainable development in urban areas and the role of the public sector in establishing a framework of rules and interventions to protect the ecosystem. The passage also explores the concept of green branding as an effective strategy to improve the governance, liveability, and competitiveness of cities. Green branding involves different stakeholders in a common interest to enhance the specific characteristics of the place. Article is well structured, well written. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I appreciate your guidance. I've made some changes to the wording and i am sending it to you. Furthermore, I made an effort to improve my English.

Thanks for everything. Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

I am pleased to review the paper “Environmental sustainability and territorial competitiveness: a 2 comparison between Italian provinces” (sustainability-2381991).

In my opinion at the current status the study is interesting because of the topic under investigation. Despite the interest in the topic, the paper is not ready for publication due to the numerous limitations that it presents in its current version. There is still a lot of work to do as well from a theoretical and methodological point of view. Specific comments follow below for each section of the paper and will hopefully help you with your further work on it.

Minor aspects:

·        Check writing and grammatical errors. The use of a native translator is recommended. There are errors in the title itself (italian instead of Italian), at the end of the introduction (the first paragraph instead of the first section), etc. ·        p. 9 line 391: “Finally, a further variable of 391 geographical location (northeast, northwest, centre, south, islands) was added next to the 392 column of provinces according to the ISTAT classification, which will be useful for our 393 analysis because will be explained.” Will be explained? Doesn't look like a form of academic writing.

 

Introduction

This section can be filtered to show a more direct and consistent approach. "The most important sentence in any article is the first one. If it doesn´t induce the reader to proceed to the second sentence your article is DEAD. And if the second sentence does not induce him to continue to the third sentence it is equally dead." Zinsser W. (2006), On writing well: the classic guide to writing nonfiction, New York.

The introduction focuses on the importance of development and sustainable management of the territory based on the current context. I think the introduction can be filtered to show a more direct approach towards defining what specific/s research gap/s you are trying to fill. Otherwise your facing the danger of arguing on a superficial level.

What is the existing gap in the literature?

What is the objective and the main questions to investigate around this gap?

What are the potential contributions of your research?

Under this better articulation of the introduction it will be possible to capture the readers quick attention and interest.

 

Theoretical Framework

Throughout the work I have the feeling that there is a very general and ambiguous treatment in the definition of the two central constructs on which the research is focused. Especially with regard to the territorial competitiveness construct. This concept can have very different meanings in its definition depending on the specific context in which it is analyzed. Hence, as the authors indicate, the existing definitions are very diverse. Competitiveness from the economic point of view? From the point of view of tourist attraction? Competitiveness perceived by whom (from a public, business, inhabitants, visitors, etc. sphere)? We could find an infinite number of meanings, since competitiveness, by definition, can be applied to any context. I believe that it is necessary to review and synthesize in an orderly and structured way the different currents of study of competitiveness in a territorial context, in order to finally delimit in a better way (abandoning a general and ambiguous position) the particular framework of application in the present study. It is also important to define the differences between concepts. For example, there is talk of the brand of the territory equating it to competitiveness. In some contexts we can understand that the brand of the territory can be a variable that allows representing its competitiveness, but the reality is that they are different concepts. The same idea could be applied around sustainability. Sustainability has different dimensions (economic, socio-cultural, and environmental). Your work seems to clearly focus on the environmental dimension of sustainability. You only have to see the indicators used for the statistical study. It is important to be coherent, then, with the focus used to define sustainability. because the reality is that both positions are valid. One can approach his study from a general position, attending to all its dimensions, but he can also focus more specifically on some of them. But the approach that is taken must be respected later when defining and treating the variable in the study. Without going any further, in the same Sustainability journal we can find examples of works published by the same authors where the attitude given to sustainability differs (both multidimensional and focused on the environmental dimension). Moliner, M.Á.; Monferrer, D.; Estrada, M.; Rodríguez, R.M. Environmental Sustainability and the Hospitality Customer Experience: A Study in Tourist Accommodation. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5279. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195279 Moliner-Tena, M.Á.; Monferrer-Tirado, D.; Ferreres-Bonfill, J.B.; Rodríguez-Artola, R.M. Destination Sustainability and Memorable Tourism Experiences. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11996. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111996 In fact, these same works serve to exemplify what was previously stated, how the competitiveness of a territory can be understood in different ways depending on the context. In this case, in the tourist context identified in the best tourist experience of the destination visited. And in both cases this greater "competitiveness" in tourism terms would be determined by the sustainability of the destination, as you are proposing in your work. Your theoretical development focuses on the definition of the two central constructs. But what your work raises is the existence of a causal relationship between the two. I suggest you introduce a new hypothesis section where you can justify the approach of such a relationship. I detect many arguments and affirmations used in the article that have no referential support. Not only in this section, but also in the rest of the work. In the same line, I would recommend increasing the number of references to your work, especially from indexed journals.  

Method

As I have indicated before, the objectives of the work should not be defined here, but at the beginning. The methodological part worries me especially. First of all, I work with data from 2018. Therefore, they are pre-covid data, when, as you point out, the repercussions of this pandemic may have altered the previous conception regarding some dimensions. From what is stated on p.9 from line 376, do I understand that there are indices calculated for certain provinces that correspond to dates different from those of the rest (2004)? Do the means obtained do not always include the same indicators (there are cases where no data is available)? This would be questionable. In Table 1 in the source is indicated 2019. Were the data from 2018? The technique used is nothing more than a comparative analysis of means, with indices built without any validation or control tests.   Conclusions A better definition of the gaps under study in the introduction section would facilitate the review of the discussion. It could be more clearly delved into the contributions made (theoretical and managerial). At the moment it is very improvable, especially from the theoretical point of view. Limitations and future research should appear separately.

 

 

Good luck with your research.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I appreciate your guidance. I have made some changes to the text I am sending you. I reworked part of the introduction and expanded the discussion of the results. Also, I made an effort to improve my English.

Thanks for everything. Best regards.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Dear author,

The manuscript explores an intriguing topic. To enhance its quality, it is advisable to consider the following suggestions:

The abstract could be strengthened by providing a clearer overview of the research question, methods, and main findings.

The conclusion appears lengthy, and could be streamlined by incorporating a separate discussion section that summarizes and interprets the results in light of the literature and research objectives.

It would be helpful to include more recent references that relate to the research topic and support the arguments presented in the manuscript.

Best regards

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I appreciate your guidance. I then changed the text in accordance with your suggestions.

The abstract has been strengthened with greater clarity of the research question, method, and main findings.

I reworked the final part with a discussion section of the results and the conclusions.

Also, I made an effort to improve my English.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Nice work on this manuscript.  

The writing could use a few more paragraph breaks (for example, Introduction).  Otherwise, well done. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
thanks for your advice. I send the manuscript complete with the requested changes

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Author has made an effort to solve my previous comments. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
thanks for your advice. I send the manuscript complete with the requested changes

Author Response File: Author Response.docx