Natural and Sociocultural Values of a Tourism Destination in the Function of Sustainable Tourism Development—An Example of a Protected Area

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments to the Authors:

 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this manuscript entitled “Natural and sociocultural values of a tourism destination in the function of sustainable tourism development - an example of a protected area”.

 

This research has very limited contributions to the literature, especially from a theoretical perspective. Some issues that result in the decision are listed in below. 

1.     The abstract is too long and lacks academic and compelling expression.

2.     In the Introduction section, the important topic on tourism sustainable development goals (SDGs) were almost not covered, which is tightly linked with Natural and sociocultural values of a tourism destination.  

3.     The specific objectives and significance of the research were not well stated.

4.     The related theories and important concepts, such as ESG (environmental, social, governance), have not been tightly connected with this topic.

5.     In the literature review, sub-titles with natural values, sociocultural values of a tourism destination are needed.

6.     The discussion was poorly written, this section should clearly separate into 2parts: theoretical and managerial implications. Also, social implications could also be discussed in the paper…The Discussion section appears to be a summary and reporting of the results, which has not been thoroughly associated with previous literatures and related theories. However, these implications are not included in the submitted work.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

we are grateful for all the suggestions. The suggestions impacts that our article now has more scientific significance. All changes in the text are recorded in a word document.

Best wishes

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear author, thank you for your contribution.

The case study carried out in a protected area regarding the natural and sociocultural values of a tourist destination is of great scientific importance.

I congratulate the author for the effort in this field.

The work is interesting, well documented, but in need of minor corrections.

I did not find reference 80 in the table of contents. Please check and cite this bibliography.

I would have liked the bibliography to have more references from the last 5 years (2019-2023), which would have shown a better knowledge of the current state of research on the development of sustainable tourism in protected areas.

Please reflect further on Figure 3: Research Model. From my point of view, something does not add up in this figure. I have the feeling that the 2 circles representing residents and visitors are floating in the air... You have analysed the impact of natural and sociocultural factors on respondents' satisfaction regarding sustainable tourism from the perspective of both categories of respondents. Perhaps you can find a better way to emphasize this in that figure. For example, you can take an arrow from each category of respondents to the 2 categories of analysed factors.

I think the manuscript needs minor changes.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

we are grateful for all suggestions. The suggestions have the effect that our article now has more scientific significance. All changes in the text are recorded in a Word document.

Best wishes

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, this article is not very innovative in the field of academic research. The role of natural and socio-cultural values of tourist destinations in sustainable tourism development has always been an important area of research, but the case of protected areas as tourist destinations is often used to explore practices and strategies for sustainable tourism development.

1. This paper lacks detailed description of the method. Although quantitative research methods and interviewees were mentioned, specific questionnaire design, sample selection methods and data analysis methods were not specified. A more detailed description of the methodology will help readers understand the credibility and applicability of the study.

2. Some relevant concepts and research results are mentioned in the paper, but no specific citations and references are given, which makes it impossible for readers to find and verify the sources of relevant information

3. The analysis of results and discussions is not deep enough. The article mentioned the influence of socio-cultural and natural factors on the satisfaction of sustainable tourism, but did not further analyze the specific contents and reasons of these influences. Through more detailed analysis and discussion of the results, the research can be more convincing. It is important to add a discussion section. In the discussion section, you should show how your manuscript compares to other articles on the topic, especially recent ones.

4. It is suggested that the author put forward specific policies and suggestions based on the research conclusions of this paper, so as to better apply the research results of this paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

we are grateful for all suggestions. The suggestions have the effect that our article now has more scientific significance. All changes in the text are recorded in a Word document.

Best wishes

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Autors,

Your paper is quite interesting.

I suggest you add the following:

1. Break down the conclusion section into: a. Conclusion and b. Managerial applications

2. Add a Limitations to the study and further research section

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

we are grateful for all suggestions. The suggestions have the effect that our article now has more scientific significance. All changes in the text are recorded in a Word document.

Best wishes

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the revision. There were two same section termed as "Managerial Implications", which needs further re-structured and revised.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

In this second round, we also fully appreciated your suggestion. In the Conclusion chapter, we deleted subchapter 7.1. We have completely revised the text and now have a new chapter Conclusion, with only one subchapter.

We are grateful for your trust!

Best wishes

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments and suggestions for the author:

Dear authors, thank you for your feedback. After the author's modification, all my questions are answered, which makes the structure of this paper more rigorous and the logic clearer.

Wish you all the best and success in your work!

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing in English is required.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We are grateful for your trust again.

Best wishes!