Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Sustainable Waste Management^†

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.       Abstract should be rewritten in a more interactive way

2.       The author should further discuss the importance of this study.

3.       The author should relate publications and their outcomes for better understanding in the Results section  

 

4.       How does this study contributes to literature of waste management 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

Point 1:       Abstract should be rewritten in a more interactive way

 

 Response 1: The abstract has been rewritten to comply with the guideleness.

 

Point 2:        The author should further discuss the importance of this study.

 

Response 2:    We discuss the importance of the study further in abstract and full paper.

 

Point 3:       The author should relate publications and their outcomes for better understanding in the Results section 

 Response 3: the results section was improved and enlarged based on the related publications and their outcomes relations.

 

Point 4:       How does this study contributes to literature of waste management

 

Response 4:  This study’s contribution to the literature of waste management   was detailed with supported studies and points. Such as indicated in the manuscript “….The theoretical contribution of this study is to list the scientific literature on sustainable waste management and offer preliminary criteria for developing a framework for sustainable waste management as a long-term competitive advantage in waste management. Recognizing influential articles, identifying the most prominent journals in this field, and highlighting potential international collaborators are all useful for the managers, scientific community and journal editors. With this study, the sustainable waste management literature has been reviewed and summarized, and the trends in this field have been revealed. It is thought that the results will form a basis for academicians and professionals for future research.”

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Please find enclosed my comments on the manuscript number sustainability-2094050 entitled "Bibliometric Analysis of Studies on Sustainable Waste Management" submitted for publication in Sustainability. The topic sounds interesting. However, it is needed to do a major revision before consider to publish in this journal.

1.       Please correct the number of Figure captions. Recheck them again. There are 2 figures 1 in this paper.

2.       Captions are too short and detailed caption should be added (Table and Figures).

3.       Discussion section should be added and more comparisons to other studies in Discussion section must be added.  Discussions of the results are not strong.

4.        The English language of manuscript should be improved.

5.       Analytical Method is not clear. In this paper is there any statistical analysis?

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

 

Point 1:       Please correct the number of Figure captions. Recheck them again. There are 2 figures 1 in this paper.

Response 1: All figures and tables were checked and revised again.

Point 2:       Captions are too short and detailed caption should be added (Table and Figures).

Response 2: Captions are detailed and added.

Point 3:     Discussion section should be added and more comparisons to other studies in Discussion section must be added.  Discussions of the results are not strong.

Response 3: The discussion section has been improved and more comparisons to other studies have been added.

Point 4:        The English language of manuscript should be improved.

Response 4: The manuscript's English language has been improved.

Point 5:        Analytical Method is not clear. In this paper is there any statistical analysis?

Response 5: The methods and techniques were described in detail under the section on data collection and processing."

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Please do check for minor sentences/spell check viz., depleting instead of depleted and in last part Congress at .... mention place then date of congress. 

Author Response

Point 1 Please do check for minor sentences/spell check viz., depleting instead of depleted and in last part Congress at .... mention place then date of congress. .

 Response 1: The entire manuscript has been reviewed again and the English has been edited.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have revised and answered all the comments well. Therefore, It is accepted to publish in this journal.