Progress in Sustainable Tourism Research: An Analysis of the Comprehensive Literature and Future Research Directions
, V. Nagaraj 2, Mohammad Haseeb 3,*, Sameer Sultan 4, Md. Emran Hossain 5,*, Mustafa Kamal 6 and Syed Mehmood Raza Shah 7
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper presents commendable research.
Author Response
Comment: The paper presents commendable research.
Response: Dear respected reviewer for your encouraging comment. We are really grateful to you. We have also taken the professional proofreading service.
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper aims to give a comprehensive literature review in the field of the Sustainable tourism, and 52 previous studies were closed to review this topic. This is an interesting idea for summarizing the research themes, methods and the research gaps from the perspective of sustainable tourism. However, there are some content need to revise and update in this manuscript. Therefore, I suggest receiving this paper after a minor revision.
1. The content of the Figure 1 could be changed into Table.
2. The conclusion seems too short.
3. The References exists some problems, please revise this Section carefully and thoroughly.
Author Response
Comment: This paper aims to give a comprehensive literature review in the field of the Sustainable tourism, and 52 previous studies were closed to review this topic. This is an interesting idea for summarizing the research themes, methods and the research gaps from the perspective of sustainable tourism. However, there are some content need to revise and update in this manuscript. Therefore, I suggest receiving this paper after a minor revision.
Response: Thank you so much dear respected reviewer. We are really thankful to you for your meticulous efforts. We have addressed all of your raising issues.
Comment 1: The content of the Figure 1 could be changed into Table.
Response: Thank you so much. We have now changed Figure 1 into Table 1 as per your recommendation.
- The conclusion seems too short.
Response: Thank you so much. We have now revised the conclusion section as per your recommendation.
- The References exists some problems, please revise this Section carefully and thoroughly.
Response: Many thanks for your meticulous feedback regarding our manuscript. We have nor thoroughly checked the reference section as per journal guideline with the help of professional manuscript editor.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper describes a comprehensive literature review about sustainable tourism.
The topic is of great interest, but the paper appears very limited and with several gaps:
- the introduction is very superficial and provides little useful information. It should be better described also with quantitative data and with more bibliographic references
- the selection of 52 articles published between 1990 and 2021 appears very limited. For example, this study Marinello et al., 2021 - Indicators for sustainable touristic destinations: a critical review (which is recommended to be cited), identifies over 100.
- more analyzes on the selected articles should be done. Currently the results are modest
Author Response
Comment: The paper describes a comprehensive literature review about sustainable tourism. The topic is of great interest, but the paper appears very limited and with several gaps:
Response: Thank you so much, dear respected reviewer for your valuable time to review our manuscript and giving us a chance to improve the quality of the manuscript. We have now considered your points and addressed the raised issues.
Comment: The introduction is very superficial and provides little useful information. It should be better described also with quantitative data and with more bibliographic references.
Response: Thanks a lot. We have now updated the reference section with relevant information and references.
Comment: the selection of 52 articles published between 1990 and 2021 appears very limited. For example, this study Marinello et al., 2021 - Indicators for sustainable touristic destinations: a critical review (which is recommended to be cited), identifies over 100. More analyzes on the selected articles should be done. Currently the results are modest.
Response: Thank you so much for your valuable feedback. Yes, we have limited our review articles with different selection criteria and different selective perspective of sustainable tourism to classify the subject matter of sustainable tourism research into three major categories, including (a) Development and Dimensions of Sustainable Tourism, (b) Issues, Challenges, and Needs of Sustainable Tourism, (c) Sustainable Tourism Practices and Measurement. Therefore, we were able to includes only 52 papers. Thanks for your helpful suggested paper that we also included in our paper which is really relevant. We can assure you that in future we will keep your suggestion in mind while taking any research in this subject matter including more research papers with broad dimensions and more bibliometric and meta-analysis. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewer 4 Report
Thank you for the opportunity of reading and reviewing your interesting manuscript. It is a review paper discussing the issue of sustainable tourism. The topic is important and up-to-date so that the approach of this topic is justified. The authors explain in detail how the papers were selected but I think more explanations would be beneficial: why these databases were chosen and why several criteria were used to exclude paper (for example the Bell s list which is questionable).
Regarding the content itself, I like table 1 where the authors present relevant authors, but I would expect to find a discussion on the sub-topics from the vast body of research on ”sustainable tourism”. I recommend authors to work on this point which appears to me as the most important weakness. That would be the most interesting part.
One point more would be to identify authors, journals etc. where the most / most important papers were published. Perhaps using a visualisation tool or software would enhance the readability of the paper.
Good luck!
Author Response
Comment: Thank you for the opportunity of reading and reviewing your interesting manuscript. It is a review paper discussing the issue of sustainable tourism. The topic is important and up-to-date so that the approach of this topic is justified. The authors explain in detail how the papers were selected but I think more explanations would be beneficial: why these databases were chosen and why several criteria were used to exclude paper (for example the Bell s list which is questionable).
Response: Thank you so much, dear respected reviewer for your valuable time to review our manuscript and giving us a chance to improve the quality of the manuscript. We have now considered your points and addressed the raised issues. We have now elaborated the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Comment: Regarding the content itself, I like table 1 where the authors present relevant authors, but I would expect to find a discussion on the sub-topics from the vast body of research on” sustainable tourism”. I recommend authors to work on this point which appears to me as the most important weakness. That would be the most interesting part.
Response: Thank you so much for your valuable feedback. We have now classified the subject matter of sustainable tourism research into three major categories, including (a) Development and Dimensions of Sustainable Tourism, (b) Issues, Challenges, and Needs of Sustainable Tourism, (c) Sustainable Tourism Practices and Measurement. We have also discussed in the third section of the paper as per three broad areas of our review.
One point more would be to identify authors, journals etc. where the most / most important papers were published. Perhaps using a visualisation tool or software would enhance the readability of the paper.
Good luck!
Response: Thanks for your helpful suggestion. In this work, we limited ourselves as only the reviewing the related literature and providing the direction of future research as explore the review. However, we did not perform any bibliometric analysis using Vosviewer software for identifying the most important papers. We can assure you that in future we will keep your suggestion in mind while taking any research in this subject matter including more research papers with broad dimensions and more bibliometric and meta-analysis. Thanks for your understanding.
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
All revisions have been incorporated, improving the structure and quality of the paper
