A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities: A Closer Look at Cairo’s New Administrative Capital (NAC)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsManuscript title:
A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities: A Closer Look at Cairo's New Administrative Capital (NAC)
Review:
This manuscript materials need to be more concise in explaining sections 3 – 9. As well as elaborate the sections 10 – 11. Especially to meet the topics related to the title. There is a lack of empirical analysis of the model used which is applied to Cairo's New Administrative Capital.
Line 22 - 23
This paper introducing an innovative and integrated model for evaluating the sustainability of architectural practices emerging in megacities.
How applicable is this model in megacities? Why do the authors not give adequate examples of Cairo’s NAC?
Line 48 - 49
This paper seeks to delve into the realm of sustainable architecture within megacities by employing the NAC in Cairo as a compelling case study.
Which part of the article explains NAC in Cairo as a compelling case study?
The methodology is ambiguous. Some sentence repetitions can be avoided.
Section 3 (Previous related studies) and 4 (New Cities as a Global and Egyptian Trend…) are not directly related to the title as well as the objective of this article. The authors have to paraphrase and make the explanations more related to the title.
Section 5 (New Cities as a Global and Egyptian Trend) can be more concise and reduce the discussion which is not related to the manuscript title.
Section 6 (Overview of the New Administrative Capital) can be improved by applying more analytical statements in line with the manuscript title.
Section 7 (Eco, Social and Economic Dimensions of Architectural Sustainability) does not need subsection 7.1 to explain 7.1.1 to 7.1.5
Section 8 (Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Architecture in Megacities) is very normative and does not come to the discussion on how to measure the sustainability of megacities
Section 9 (Sustainable Architecture Features in the New Administrative Capital (NAC) can be written more argumentatively to be more consistent with the manuscript title.
Section 10 (A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities). The table in this section is the main material related to the title. The main feature of this section is Table 02: Comprehensive assessment model for sustainable architecture in megacities. The table can be visualized to make it easier to understand the content.
Sections 11 and 12 are too short.
The conclusion section needs to be inserted.
Note:
- Overall, a re-structuring, editing, and proofreading the manuscript is necessary.
- If the authors do not originally take the pictures used in this manuscript, they require copyright clearance. The authors have to do it appropriately.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageExtensive editing of English language required
Author Response
Response for Comments and Suggestions for Authors (reviewer 01)
Manuscript title:
A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities: A Closer Look at Cairo's New Administrative Capital (NAC)
The authors appreciate the valuable feedback provided by the reviewers and have taken significant steps to address each comment and suggestion. They condensed and rephrased sections 3-9, while thoroughly reviewing and detailing sections 10 and 11 to align more closely with the manuscript's title. Empirical analysis of the model used in Cairo's New Administrative Capital was emphasized, with a focus on the government district to reflect the government's commitment to sustainability. The methodology was clarified, and sections were reformulated to establish a stronger connection with the manuscript's title. Section 6 was enhanced with additional analytical data, and unnecessary subsections were removed from section 7. Section 8 was revised to include discussions on measuring sustainability in large cities, and section 9 was written more argumentatively to align with the manuscript's title. A clear diagram was added to section 10 for improved clarity, and sections 11 and 12 were reformed and elaborated to correspond with sections 12, 13, and 14 in the updated version. Overall, the manuscript underwent restructuring, editing, and proofreading to enhance specificity and clarity. Additionally, the authors ensured copyright clearance for all images used in the research.
Review:
- This manuscript materials need to be more concise in explaining sections 3 – 9. As well as elaborate the sections 10 – 11. Especially to meet the topics related to the title. There is a lack of empirical analysis of the model used which is applied to Cairo's New Administrative Capital.This manuscript should be more concise in explaining Sections 3 to 9, as well as detailing Sections 10 and 11, especially to align with the topics related to the title. There is a lack of empirical analysis of the model used and its application to the New Administrative Capital in Cairo.
Authors Response
Sections 3-9 were condensed and rephrased by approximately 35%, as demonstrated in the revised paper. Additionally, the content of Section 10 (now Section 11 in the updated version) was thoroughly reviewed. Furthermore, the section discussing findings and recommendations was expanded, and special segments were included to summarize specific aspects of the research (Sections 12, 13, 14).
- Line 22 – 23,This paper introducing an innovative and integrated model for evaluating the sustainability of architectural practices emerging in megacities. How applicable is this model in megacities? Why do the authors not give adequate examples of Cairo’s NAC?
Authors Response:
The practical study of the research focused on the government district in the New Administrative Capital because it is nearly completed and because it reflects the extent of the government’s commitment to implementing its media discourse emphasizing sustainability on the ground. The research suggested in the recommendations section the possibility of applying the proposed evaluation model to the remaining parts of the New Administrative Capital. Given the vast size of the project, which is approaching 176 thousand acres, further research is needed on the remaining areas that have not yet been completed.
- Line 48 – 49,This paper seeks to delve into the realm of sustainable architecture within megacities by employing the NAC in Cairo as a compelling case study. Which part of the article explains NAC in Cairo as a compelling case study? The methodology is ambiguous. Some sentence repetitions can be avoided.
Authors Response:
The part explaining the New Administrative Capital is in Part No. 6, titled "Overview of the New Administrative Capital." This section has been expanded to include much information, as well as criticism of sustainability practices in the capital. In Part No. 10, titled "Sustainable Architecture Features in the New Administrative Capital (NAC)," additional details have been provided, and it has been reinstated. It is essential to formulate the methodology clearly, as demonstrated in the revised version of the research. however , the choice of research methodology in this paper was carefully considered to ensure a comprehensive and holistic examination of sustainability in architectural practices within emerging megacities. While the reviewer suggests alternative methods such as exploratory influence factor analysis, structural equation modeling, and QCA, it's important to recognize that each research method has its strengths and limitations. The mixed methods approach adopted in this study allows for a balanced integration of qualitative and quantitative data, providing a nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics surrounding sustainability in architectural practices. This approach enables us to capture not only the quantitative aspects of sustainability, such as energy efficiency and resource consumption, but also the qualitative dimensions, including social dynamics and cultural influences. Furthermore, the methodology section was rewritten and expanded to clarify the rationale behind the chosen approach. The inclusion of a literature review, policy analysis, and theoretical synthesis ensures a comprehensive understanding of the research context and theoretical underpinnings. Additionally, the utilization of field visits and interviews with engineering offices in the New Administrative Capital of Cairo enhances the empirical grounding of the study, allowing for firsthand insights into sustainability practices in real-world settings. This empirical component adds depth and richness to the analysis, supplementing the theoretical framework with practical perspectives. While alternative research methods may offer valuable insights, the mixed methods approach employed in this paper offers a robust and comprehensive framework for studying sustainability in architectural practices within emerging megacities.
- Section 3 (Previous related studies) and 4 (New Cities as a Global and Egyptian Trend…) are not directly related to the title as well as the objective of this article. The authors have to paraphrase and make the explanations more related to the title.
Authors Response:
These two parts have been reformulated to establish a stronger connection with the title of the research, as evident in the latest version of the study.
- Section 5 (New Cities as a Global and Egyptian Trend) can be more concise and reduce the discussion which is not related to the manuscript title.
Authors Response:
According to the first note, the fifth section was shortened within the abbreviation of the research from the third to the ninth section, as you will notice from the revised version of the research.
- Section 6 (Overview of the New Administrative Capital) can be improved by applying more analytical statements in line with the manuscript title.
Authors Response:
Section 6 has been enhanced by integrating additional analytical data that aligns with the manuscript's title, thereby offering a more profound analysis in harmony with the research focus. This improvement is evident in the latest version of the research.
Section 7 (Eco, Social and Economic Dimensions of Architectural Sustainability) does not need subsection 7.1 to explain 7.1.1 to 7.1.5
Authors Response:
The note was resolved by removing sub-points and condensing their content.
Top of Form
Section 8 (Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Architecture in Megacities) is very normative and does not come to the discussion on how to measure the sustainability of megacities.
Authors Response:
The section has been revised to provide greater specificity, and additional content has been included on measuring sustainability in large cities, found on page 12 of the latest version of the research.
- Section 9 (Sustainable Architecture Features in the New Administrative Capital (NAC) can be written more argumentatively to be more consistent with the manuscript title.
Authors Response:
Done in the latest version of the research.
- Section 10 (A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities). The table in this section is the main material related to the title. The main feature of this section is Table 02: Comprehensive assessment model for sustainable architecture in megacities. The table can be visualized to make it easier to understand the content.
Authors Response:
A clear diagram was created to present the table content related to the government district, resulting in improved clarity and organization of the information. See figure no.10
- Sections 11 and 12 are too short. The conclusion section needs to be inserted.
Authors Response:
Sections 11 and 12 underwent reformation, which now correspond to Sections 12, 13, and 14 in the updated version. The discussion on the research conclusion was further elaborated, and a dedicated section for Section 14, titled "Conclusion & Findings," was introduced.
Note:
- Overall, a re-structuring, editing, and proofreading the manuscript is necessary.
Authors Response:
Following your insightful feedback, I am confident that this aspect has been rectified. The research underwent a reorganization, resulting in greater specificity, consolidation, and shorter points. Additionally, discussions were expanded upon in certain areas. Furthermore, efforts were made to enhance the language.
- If the authors do not originally take the pictures used in this manuscript, they require copyright clearance. The authors have to do it appropriately.
Authors Response:
All the images in the research are either publicly available or obtained from responsible consultancy offices involved in the implementation, as mentioned in the acknowledgments, or produced by the authors.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI'd be happy to review the paper. This research topic is very meaningful. After reading this paper. I think the structure of this article is reasonable and the logical relationship is clear. In order to help this paper do better, I have some suggestions.
1. In the part of research review, the views of different scholars are somewhat less sorted out.
2, the conclusion part, it is recommended to write in sections, now it is too general.
3. I have not seen the research method of this paper. Why use existing research methods. I feel so sorry. Although this topic is good, I think there are better ways to study it. For example, exploratory influence factor analysis, structural equation model, QCA, etc.
4. The data in Table 1 is a little old, so it is recommended to update the latest data.
5, the lack of analysis diagram, just the scene picture is not enough.
To sum up, I think this paper needs to be adjusted and reviewed again.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Response for Comments and Suggestions for Authors (reviewer 02)
Manuscript title:
A Comprehensive Model to Assess Sustainable Architecture in Emerged Megacities: A Closer Look at Cairo's New Administrative Capital (NAC)
We appreciate the valuable feedback provided by the reviewers. We've taken each comment seriously and made significant revisions to address them. In response to concerns about the organization of views from different scholars, we've restructured our research review section to provide greater clarity. Additionally, we've reformed our conclusion, splitting it into sections for more detailed analysis. Regarding the choice of research methodology, we've carefully explained our decision to use a mixed methods approach, emphasizing its suitability for our study on sustainability in architectural practices. We assure you that the data presented in Table 1, including the establishment date of Cairo's New Administrative Capital, is up-to-date and accurate. To enhance clarity, we've added a clear diagram to complement the information on the government district. Lastly, we've made efforts to improve the language and overall quality of our manuscript based on your feedback. We're confident that these revisions have strengthened our research and made it more valuable to readers.
Review:
- In the part of research review, the views of different scholars are somewhat less sorted out.
Authors Response
Thank you for the important note. The note has been processed as is in the revised version of the research
- the conclusion part, it is recommended to write in sections, now it is too general.
Authors Response:
Sections 11 and 12 underwent reformation, which now correspond to Sections 12, 13, and 14 in the updated version. The discussion on the research conclusion was further elaborated, and a dedicated section for Section 14, titled "Conclusion & Findings," was introduced.
- I have not seen the research method of this paper. Why use existing research methods. I feel so sorry. Although this topic is good, I think there are better ways to study it. For example, exploratory influence factor analysis, structural equation model, QCA, etc.
Thanks for your valuable note , however , the choice of research methodology in this paper was carefully considered to ensure a comprehensive and holistic examination of sustainability in architectural practices within emerging megacities. While the reviewer suggests alternative methods such as exploratory influence factor analysis, structural equation modeling, and QCA, it's important to recognize that each research method has its strengths and limitations. The mixed methods approach adopted in this study allows for a balanced integration of qualitative and quantitative data, providing a nuanced understanding of the complex dynamics surrounding sustainability in architectural practices. This approach enables us to capture not only the quantitative aspects of sustainability, such as energy efficiency and resource consumption, but also the qualitative dimensions, including social dynamics and cultural influences. Furthermore, the methodology section was rewritten and expanded to clarify the rationale behind the chosen approach. The inclusion of a literature review, policy analysis, and theoretical synthesis ensures a comprehensive understanding of the research context and theoretical underpinnings. Additionally, the utilization of field visits and interviews with engineering offices in the New Administrative Capital of Cairo enhances the empirical grounding of the study, allowing for firsthand insights into sustainability practices in real-world settings. This empirical component adds depth and richness to the analysis, supplementing the theoretical framework with practical perspectives. While alternative research methods may offer valuable insights, the mixed methods approach employed in this paper offers a robust and comprehensive framework for studying sustainability in architectural practices within emerging megacities.
- The data in Table 1 is a little old, so it is recommended to update the latest data.
The information presented in the table represents the most recent data available to the authors. Specifically, the authors have included the establishment date of the New Administrative Capital, which is noted as the most recent emerging capital globally. The authors affirm that this information is up-to-date and accurate.
- the lack of analysis diagram, just the scene picture is not enough.
Authors Response:
A clear diagram was created to present the table content related to the government district, resulting in improved clarity and organization of the information. See figure no.10
- the lack of analysis diagram, just the scene picture is not enough. To sum up, I think this paper needs to be adjusted and reviewed again. Comments on the Quality of English Language.
Authors Response:
Following your insightful feedback, I am confident that this aspect has been rectified. The research underwent a reorganization, resulting in greater specificity, consolidation, and shorter points. Additionally, discussions were expanded upon in certain areas. Furthermore, efforts were made to enhance the language.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsMany thanks to the author for the revision. I have no other suggestions.
