Framework and Perception Survey of Tourism Accessibility Concerning Regional Airports Based on Nexus Thinking: An Empirical Study in Ganzi Prefecture, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

The manuscript entitled Framework and Perception Survey of Tourism Accessibility about Regional Airport based on Nexus Thinking: An empirical study in Ganzi Prefecture, China deals with an interesting and current topic and it gives valuable information on the elements that influence the perception of tourism accessibility. The study is well written, research hypotheses clearly presented, the discussion is balanced. Some relevant information is missing and it needs some improvements. Please see the document attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer，

Thank you for your comments and please see the document  attachment.

Best regards，

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In my view, this manuscript shed light about how Nexus Thinking approach is served to asses multifactorial aspect that have interdependence between airport, passenger and destination. Through the  KNOWLEDGE, INVOLVEMENT, PRACTICE makes accessible the space of Yading Regional Airport.The idea and conceptualization are pretty good; however, the manuscript still present the following aspects, which affect the understanding of the manuscript.

1. This manuscript have not addressed adequately the context of Nexus Thinking. Perhaps, may it be useful read this literature:

Ronald C. Estoque,2023, Complexity and diversity of nexuses: A review of the nexus approach in the sustainability context https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158612

Dahlmann, Frederik and Bullock Graham, 2020, Nexus thinking in business: Analysing corporate responses to interconnected global sustainability challenges, Environmental Science & Policy, 107 . pp. 90-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.02.022 ISSN 1462-9011.

Schwanen, Tim, 2017, Thinking complex interconnections: Transition, nexus and Geography, https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12223 .

2. The references appear without an alphabetic order and this phenomenon discourage the necessary contrast of literature.

3. Although the methodology mentions the use of the ArcCatalog for mileage statistics, the process is not explain in the dataset (line 338).

4. In line 218 take-off or take off better than takeoff.

5. In line 322 Meanwhile is in capital letter after coma no point.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer，

Thank you for your comments and please see the document  attachment.

Best regards，

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In the study, touristic destinations in mountainous regions were evaluated in terms of accessibility, which is an obstacle to opening up to tourism. In the evaluation, the perceptions of the public and tourists were evaluated and important results were obtained. Nowadays, alternative tourism types are gaining more and more importance, it is very important to evaluate the destinations in mountainous regions in terms of tourism.

The purpose of the research and the analyzes used were evaluated as appropriate.

In the research, 4 main factors were determined for tourist accessibility: "facilities, individuals, services and places". This is how hypotheses are formed.

In the analysis, 12 sub-factors were determined. These variables were validated by Principal component analysis.

In conclusion;

-the perception of accessibility has an important representation in the subjectivity space,

-the perception of accessibility is influenced by the attitude of the public,

It has been determined that tourism accessibility is perceived within the framework of tourist flow and airport traffic safety.

It was concluded that tourism activities should be integrated and built on an identity.

There are no problems with the basic criteria of the study. It would be useful to review it once again in terms of grammar. Minor fixes are needed.

Very important results were obtained in the research, it is recommended to be supported with recent resources in the discussion section, and this revision will strengthen the research.

 

I wish you good luck.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer，

Thank you for your comments and please see the document  attachment.

Best regards，

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Review of the Manuscript

“Framework and Perception Survey of Tourism Accessibility about Regional Airport based on Nexus Thinking:

An empirical study in Ganzi Prefecture, China”

The article is well written. The tasks are clearly defined. The materials and methods are described in detail, all necessary tables and graphs are submitted. The conclusions are well structured.

However, I have some comments concerning the design of the references. Firstly, it seems that the font is enlarged here for some reason. Secondly, there is some inconsistency in the description of the listed positions. For example, in one of the lines the language Chinese is indicated with a small letter (line 766, line 770, line 774), while in the others cases it is indicated with a capital letter (line 809, line 815, line 817).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer，

Thank you for your comments and please see the document  attachment.

Best regards，

Author

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf