Regional Tourism Ecosystem as a Tool for Sustainable Development during the Economic Crisis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Abstact - should be verified in accordance with the journal's guidelines. The methods used in the article are missing, except for the research results. Instead, there is other unnecessary information.

Intuition.

Why are developmental level research findings included in the 4th discussion?

Item 10 appears 4 times in the chapter on lines: 139, 148, 163, 180].

Technical errors:

[123, 163, 180, 344, 551 – necessary period; 133, 180 – no break;

209 to 222. 243 to 293, 298- 334 bad literary notation;

241- missing period at the end of the sentences

Figure 2 requires correction

All figures have no sources listed

Author Response

Allow me to thank the reviewer who carefully studied our work, noted technical errors. All this allowed the authors of the article to significantly improve the text of the work.

1. The section "Results" implies the presentation of the results of the study in the form of theoretical or empirical data on declared research issues within the framework of the problem and using previously indicated materials and methods. The results can be presented either as text or as processed (tables, graphs, charts, photographs, pictures, etc.). The Discussion section implies a critical discussion of the findings in the context of published secondary data and literature. This section contains the interpretation, comparison of the results of other researchers or previously obtained results of the author of the article with the results obtained. Nevertheless, by the decision of the authors, the results of the study on the level of tourism development in the Russian regions are presented in the "Discussion" section. Because the result of the study, obtained as part of the analysis of the study, causes a discussion. The authors of the scientific study, in order to stimulate discussion, provide visual material (Tables 3 and 4). In the following, the authors provide a description that includes discussion and analysis of the main results of the study.
2. Item 10 appears 4 times in the chapter on lines: 139, 148, 163, 180. Note that the authors of the article carefully studied the reviewer's comments. Agreed with them and partially redid the indicated lines. The new text is highlighted in yellow.
3. Thank you for your attention to technical details. The remark is accepted. The design has been corrected.
4. 209 to 243 to 293, 298- 334 bad literary notation. On these lines is a review of the methodology for the problems studied in the article: the sustainable development of the tourism sector and the development of the methodology of digital ecosystems in general, and in the tourism sector, in particular. Since we studied a significant number of researchers' works, we considered it possible to present a classification of researchers' works. The main ideas that researchers consider in their work on this issue were chosen as the basis of the classification. It is not possible to present a more detailed description of each work of each author due to the limited scope of our article as a whole. And also taking into account the fact that our article is a presentation of the results of the research we conducted, and not a general analysis of the methodology on the problems of our research. Otherwise, we would present a different type of article for publication. However, we made small clarifications to the listed lines - more correctly indicated the names of the researchers, added the year of publication of the works.
5. Thank you for your attention to technical details. The remark is accepted. The design has been corrected.
6. Thank you for your attention to technical details. The remark is accepted. The design has been corrected.
7. The figures presented in the tables and shown in the figures are the results of a joint study conducted by the authors of the article, about which there is a corresponding explanation in the text. Except for Table 1 and Figure 6, which have other authors, as indicated in the comments.

Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

thank you for your manuscript and congratulations for your interest in the subject.

Please find enclosed some indications that would help to improve the quality and accuracy of your manuscript for publication. Please, as far as possible, include statistics on the case in question.

Kind regards

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Allow me to express gratitude to the reviewer who carefully studied our work, noted technical and bibliographic errors. All this allowed the authors of the article to significantly improve the text of the work. The attached file provides our responses to the comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

The study aims to evaluate the current status of sustainable development in the regions of the Russian Federation, taking into account the impact of COVID-19 restrictions in 2020 and 2021 as well as the sanctions imposed on the Russian economy in 2022–2023. The authors provide their novel perspective on the expansion of regional tourist ecosystems as a means of tackling this pervasive problem. Foreign and local analysts evaluate the condition of the Russian economy, namely some sectors, as being in a state of crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the tourism and hospitality sectors. The study's authors utilize a variety of complex sustainability metrics to assess the influence of the tourism industry in different regions of the Russian Federation on the overall sustainability of regional development. 

 

Furthermore, they furnish rating outcomes for the Russian areas, determined by their all-encompassing sustainability indices. Nevertheless, the authors want to support their own position that the future possibility of regional sustainability depends on the presence, implementation, and creation of inventive approaches and techniques for development. A prominent feature is the extensive integration of innovations, such as digital ecosystems, into conventional management approaches. The paper adds novelty to both practical and academic literature.

Congratulations on your work. I recommend that your work be accepted as it is.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, please allow us to express our gratitude for your time spent studying our work. Your high assessment of our joint work, prepared based on the results of the study of the sustainability of Russian regions through the development of the tourism sector and ecosystems in the field of regional tourism, contributes to the continuation of our research. We understand that an article submitted by us for publication in a journal can cause discussion. We support the development of a scientific discussion that positively affects the development of scientific thought. We understand that the scientific concepts that are accepted today in Russian and foreign science in relation to a number of events of the post-Covid period may have differences. Nevertheless, we present an original view on the level of development of the tourism sector in the Russian regions at the current stage. Thank you for supporting our article.

Reviewer 4 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Introduction and background information were well written and provided a comprehensive (and non-biased) view of the tourist industry in the Russian Federation over the past several years. Some might argue that the background information is too much but I believe it establishes that the authors did their due diligence in research and understanding the subject matter.

The SDG's provided do match up with the manuscript

The UNWTO (2005) goals are a bit old but the authors provided the relevance and newer examples as well. Although dated, they are accurate.

355 "It should be mentioned that our research is focused on the examination of the current state of regional tourism (in the context of the crisis) and the development of digital ecosystems." It was valuable to add this statement as it shows the authors are viewing this study from a "bigger picture, international" perspective, not just that of the region/country.

Methodology is applicable and used properly in this study. 

495 Need a better quality image

502 Although the sample is large enough, there should be an additional table/graph showing the demographical breakdown. 

Figures 10/11. Although the information is acceptable, the model provided is a bit challenging to review and understanding. The use of additional formatting tools (color, fonts, etc.) to distinguish between levels would be beneficial.

727 Different style/size of font. Standardize throughout text.

 

 

Author Response

Allow me to express gratitude to the reviewer who carefully studied our work, noted technical and bibliographic errors. All this allowed the authors of the article to significantly improve the text of the work.

1. You appreciated the Introduction of our article, but since other reviewers made a number of comments on this section, we made changes to the Introduction section, clarified a number of details. The changes are highlighted in yellow.
2. We agree.
3. We agree.
4. Changes were also made to the Study Methodology and additional studies were added. The changes are highlighted in yellow. The name of paragraph 2 has changed. - Sustainable tourism and digital ecosystem concepts.
5. Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to find a map of Russia in a clearer image. These are the features of the programs in which it is formed. We have no time to find a clearer source material. And color painting was done by the authors of the article, who are not programmers. We believe that to illustrate our conclusions, the quality of the drawing is suitable.
6. Thanks for the remark. Fixed!
7. According to the comments, in the 727 line the font is corrected to the desired (Palatino), the text is standardized in all work.

Reviewer 5 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Interesting topic. Low quality article. The article is difficult to read. It is not entirely clear what the authors are writing about in terms of scientific value. The research problem and research objective should be clearly defined.

The assumed goal was not clearly defined. Considerations inherent in the ecosystem, clusters and digital solutions are not new issues. It is necessary to clearly justify why the Russian context is important. The reviewer does not deny the importance of the problem. But a scientific article should clearly present this aspect.

The abstract should briefly indicate the research methods used. Indicating the analysis of numerous sustainable development indicators is insufficient.

There is no justification for COVID-19. The pandemic should be linked to the military conflict.

There is a lack of research hypotheses. They should be formulated clearly. Then they need to be verified.

46 what current events - should be clarified. The dynamics of socio-economic changes during COVID-19 and after the pandemic and the political, economic and military context

In table 2, in column 3, the symbol "%" is in the header. Do not write "%" in the numbers below.

Low level of scientific insight. Summary statistics are not a sufficient element of a research paper. In studies based on a sample of respondents, it should be indicated whether the minimum sample size criterion has been met. The reliability of the presented results is low.

Authors should indicate what the article contributes to science. How do the obtained research results influence science on a global scale. It is worth indicating future research directions.

Author Response

Allow me to express gratitude to the reviewer who carefully studied our work, noted technical and bibliographic errors. All this allowed the authors of the article to significantly improve the text of the work

The reviewer pointed out the poor quality of the Abstract, the poorly stated objectives and objectives of the study that were described in the Introduction. We agree with the criticism of our work regarding the remarks. Therefore, we revised the Abstract, made significant changes to the Introduction section, supplemented section 2 -Metodology. Also clarified (changed) the name of section 2 - Sustainable tourism and digital ecosystem concepts. This made it possible to more clearly reflect the scientific tasks, purpose and methods of our research.

Despite a number of constructive comments from the reviewer, some of his comments cannot be accepted by us, since this does not correspond to the real situation in the field of tourism in Russia in 2022-2023, as well as in relation to the development of digital ecosystems and the sustainability of Russian regions.

Reaching sustainable positive growth rates close to potential in the face of unprecedented sanctions pressure is the main achievement of the state, business and the entire Russian society in 2023. According to the results of the second quarter of 2023, Russia's GDP grew by 4.9%, ROSSTAT previously estimated. As a result, the economy won back the fall of the sanctions crisis, exceeding the level of the first quarter of 2022. According to ROSSTAT, the total number of tourist trips of Russians for the three quarters of 2023 amounted to 134 955 161 trips, which is 16.48% more than in the same period of 2022 (115 854 093 trips).

Yes, we will agree with the fact that international tourism (entry and departure abroad in Russia) in 2022-2023 showed a significant drop (as we indicated in the Introduction section). But the increase in domestic tourism brought significant revenues to the Russian tourism industry. This fact is striking, since for the entire period from 2000 to 2019, domestic tourism in Russia significantly (in terms of income) lagged behind international tourism. The increase in tourist flow occurred in all regions of Russia, and in some reached a high level: the Black Sea coast (Krasnodar Territory), Dagestan, Karelia, Caucasian Mineral Waters, etc. Even during the Covid pandemic, the tourism sector began to actively apply digitalization tools. Today, some regions of Russia demonstrate positive achievements in relation to digital ecosystems of the tourism sector, which also affects their sustainable development. This is our article.

Nevertheless, we understand that there are a number of problems that hinder the development of the tourism sector. We continue our research to develop an optimal model for the development of regional tourism ecosystems. We will be introducing researchers and practitioners of the journal to our further advances in this field.

Thank you for your attention to technical details. The percentages in the third column of Table 2 were removed.

Regarding the results of the sociological study, we provided information on the number of respondents. We believe that all the criteria were met.

It is still difficult for us to say how much our research at this stage has contributed to world science on a global scale. That wouldn't be entirely modest on our part. We draw attention to the fact that the concept of sustainable development, as well as the concept of the digital economy, are vast areas of scientific knowledge, in which thousands of scientists from different countries are engaged in research. We believe that only the cumulative experience of scientists from different countries of the world can form new conceptual knowledge in these areas of science. We understand our task in developing scientific thought both in Russia and covering the modern Russian experience of sustainable development on the world scientific stage. And we will try to analyze and compare the world and Russian experience in the development of digital ecosystems in the context of the sustainable development of the tourism sector.

Round 2

Reviewer 5 Report (New Reviewer)

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors made many changes. These changes resulted in an increase in the overall rating of the article. However, the article is still not of high scientific quality. Thank you for the authors' answers to the doubts contained in the review.

Research hypotheses are still missing.
Ultimately, however, the article receives a positive rating. Although the authors do not directly indicate the contribution of their work to science, this value is included in the article.

Author Response

Thank you for your attentive attitude to our work. We believed that we indicated our hypothesis in the Introduction. But, obviously, it was necessary to register this more clearly.

We have made corrections. Summarized and added text.

Lines 79-100. 

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors, 

 

The article titled "Regional Tourism Ecosystem as a Tool for Sustainable Development in a Time of Economic Crisis" aims to highlight some of the key economic elements of sustainable tourism.

After reading the paper, I have comments and suggestions to improve the paper as follows:

 

The article should be thoroughly revised from a technical point of view. 

 

 The article was not prepared in accordance with the journal's requirements.

Technical errors:

 

The article was based on very scarce literature (20 items).

The literature contains numerous technical errors. 

Tables prepared in the wrong format.

There are additional enumerations and numbering in the text.

Resulats chapter discusses research methods and presents mathematical formulas.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your attention to our work. We agree that the article that we submitted to the journal contained the comments that you indicated. We answer on points.
The article was completely redone not only from a technical, but also from a meaningful point of view. The new version of the article is made in the journal template.
The number of source lists has been increased to 55.
Errors in the design of the reference list have been corrected.
The tables have been redone.
The numbering in the text corresponds to the reference list.
The mathematical formula is under Materials and Methods.
Again, thank you for your time in our article.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your hard work. 

There are several suggestions that I want to give to the authors.

First, abstract section. The first sentence is not strong enough to highlight why it is very crucial to look at the promotion of popular tourist destinations in Russia. I tried to read your sentences, but I can't really get why it is necessary for the global scholars  (especially those who live faraway from Russia) to increase their knowledge of sustainable development by understanding Russian context. My suggestion is for the authors to directly mention why Russian government or municipalities or tourism boards need to increase their knowledge of sustainable tourism practices in the country because of certain dire situations or risks face by Russian society if such practices are not followed or ignored. In general, I feel that the abstract is quite confusing to read and need to be sharpened.

The second suggestion is related to the introduction and literature reviews that use very limited resources and sometimes too broad topics that made me confused of what the authors want to really emphasize. My suggestion is to focus more on the literature discussing the sustainable tourism in Russia and develop the theoretical framework from the overview. As the literature review/framework is not well crafted, it is actually pretty challenging for me to finish reading the whole manuscript. 

The third suggestion is to carefully choose the data to discuss. I noticed that authors have rich data collection, however, with the lack of literature framework, I feel like reading raw reports which are not really relevant to each other. My suggestion is for the authors to think about the flow that is readable and easier to understand. Also some graphs are still written in Russian, it will be better if they can recreate those graphs in English (not provide the information in the caption section). 

I do believe that the research have been meticulously conducted, however, the authors would need to rearrange on how they would present the data to the more general audiences.

Good luck.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, please allow your gratitude to be expressed because your remarks have allowed us to understand the direction in which the article needs to be corrected.

I agree with you that the first version of the article looks confusing, since we tried to fit into the format of one work a large number of research results over several years. This led to confusion in the presentation. The second version of the work completely changed the article. In order to better reveal the topic of work, we had to replace almost 85% of the text, make it more structured.

I respond to comments.

On the first note. The annotation of the work has been completely redone, as well as the Introduction. We clarify how the modern situation in Russia after the end of the Covid pandemic and the imposition of sanctions influenced the development of the tourism sector. The influence has two sides: positive and negative. We write about this. We also indicate what measures the Russian Government has taken to maintain the sphere of domestic tourism.

ON THE second note. The Methodology (Literature Review) section has been completely changed. In addition, we decided to highlight 2 blocks within this review:

1.Methodology of a concept for sustainable tourism development

2. Methodology of digital ecosystem concept development

This is done with the goal that the reader can better understand the problem being studied.

ON THE THIRD NOTE. It is agreed that the signatures in all figures must be in the same language, in this case, in English.

For the convenience of reading the text, we also divided the Materials and Methods section into 3 blocks, where the results of our studies by blocks were presented.

1. Research into level of sustainable development in Russian regions
2. Research into the prospects of tourism development in the regions of Russia
3. Research on the development of digital ecosystems in Russian regions

We believe that our study is comprehensive. To begin with, we considered how stable the regions of Russia can be considered in their development at the current stage. Then we looked at what the prospects for the development of the regional tourism sector are today, what the consumer of tourist services wants. And since we believe that these prospects are associated with the development of digital ecosystems, in the 3rd block of research we presented the results of how at the current stage the regions of Russia are developing digital ecosystems.

We add that our study will continue, as new questions appear for study.

We hope that we were able to better present our data.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Unfortunately this article does not comply with MDPI standards. It must be redone to meet the requirements because it can have a contribution to the scholarship 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your time spent reviewing our work. We agree with you that our article required a major alteration. We couldn't stand the MDPI standards template. But we have fixed our work completely.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper seems is not completed or finished once it is not presented in the journal template and some sections are highlighted in yellow as if they were items to be corrected.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you for your attention you have shown to our work. We apologize for the technical errors that appeared in the text. We also inform you that we have completely redone the content of the work.