Impact of Transport Trends on Sustainability in the Western Balkans: A Future-Oriented Business Sector Perspective

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. There are numerous keywords; Can "Western Balkans" be considered a keyword? It's suggested to reduce and provide more precise keywords.

2. In line 61, the abrupt introduction of transportation in the Western Balkans seems disconnected. It's important to explain the similarities, differences, and specific issues within the Western Balkans compared to previously mentioned countries.

3. The introduction lacks adequate comments, failing to clearly articulate the problems addressed, advancements made, and the advantages of this study compared to previous works.

4. The numbering of subsections in the second section are wrong; such as line 123 etc.

5. Although the author discusses 12 different trends in transportation systems, it's important to highlight which are relevant to the Western Balkans. Focus on summarizing aspects suitable for this region and their impact. Emphasize the chapter's relevance to the Western Balkans rather than providing generic information. Refrain from directly stating in line 538 that the study is about the Western Balkans.

6. The description of the questionnaire survey in section 3.1 is insufficient. Details like the number of experts with different backgrounds, questionnaire content, distribution quantity, valid responses, scoring, and data processing methods are needed. Have reliability and validity checks been conducted on the questionnaire data? Were redundant or erroneous data removed?

7. The discussion section lacks insights into the limitations, applicability, and recommendations for future research based on the study's methodology.

8. The conclusion should include more quantitative research findings and be more concise.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Fair.

Author Response

REVIEWER 1

1. There are numerous keywords; Can "Western Balkans" be considered a keyword? It's suggested to reduce and provide more precise keywords.

Thank you for this comment. The keywords are indeed very important for the recognition of the article and must be chosen carefully. At your suggestion, we have deleted some of them and kept only the following most important ones: Transport trends; congestion; accidents; infrastructure investment; operating costs; policy adaptation.

2. In line 61, the abrupt introduction of transportation in the Western Balkans seems disconnected. It's important to explain the similarities, differences, and specific issues within the Western Balkans compared to previously mentioned countries.

We greatly appreciate this comment. We have added the following paragraph, which provides an appropriate transition to the Western Balkans and indicates why this region was chosen:

“Despite the momentum of global initiatives to improve transport systems, their regional impact needs to be carefully analysed. As Europe sets out to put these transformative strategies into action, it is becoming clear that the impact and feasibility of these initiatives can vary greatly from region to region, as each region has its own unique challenges and contexts [13]. This brings us to the specific focus of our study: the Western Balkans. Due to its geographical and socio-economic characteristics, the Western Balkans is an important area for analysing the implementation and effectiveness of EU transport policy. Our analysis aims to shed light on how the Western Balkans, with its strategic importance and specific needs, can adapt to and benefit from the EU's vision for a sustainable transport future”.

3. The introduction lacks adequate comments, failing to clearly articulate the problems addressed, advancements made, and the advantages of this study compared to previous works.

Thank you for pointing out this problem. The following paragraph has been added to clarify the issues raised by your comment.

“As can be seen, the Western Balkans face many challenges and are therefore worth to be considered as a study case in the field of transport sector. Many researchers have dealt with transport issues in this region, but none of them from the perspective of emerging trends especially from the perspective of business sector. It has been shown that business stakeholders have advanced understanding of emerging technologies and their likely impacts, as well as strategic practices which could be of great benefit for policy making [22]. Their opinion is often not taken into account in this very demanding process. For this study, a comprehensive but straight forward methodology was developed to gather stakeholders opinion and assess the most promising trends that could drive the development of a sustainable transport system in the Western Balkans. In this way, we provide, for the first time, a comprehensive overview of the expected impact of emerging trends on emissions, congestion, accidents, operational cost and infrastructure investments, which can inform decision-makers and make an important contribution to the discourse on sustainable transport from a regional perspective.”

4. The numbering of subsections in the second section are wrong; such as line 123 etc.

Thank you for this comment. The automatic numbering must have been incorrect in the last iteration. It has now been corrected.

5. Although the author discusses 12 different trends in transportation systems, it's important to highlight which are relevant to the Western Balkans. Focus on summarizing aspects suitable for this region and their impact. Emphasize the chapter's relevance to the Western Balkans rather than providing generic information. Refrain from directly stating in line 538 that the study is about the Western Balkans.

Many thanks for this comment. Section (chapter) 5 has been fundamentally changed with the aim of emphasising only the relevance for the Western Balkans. Please consult the revised version of the paper for full details.

6. The description of the questionnaire survey in section 3.1 is insufficient. Details like the number of experts with different backgrounds, questionnaire content, distribution quantity, valid responses, scoring, and data processing methods are needed. Have reliability and validity checks been conducted on the questionnaire data? Were redundant or erroneous data removed?

Thank you for this comment. The following two paragraphs have been added:

“The expert group was composed of 49 professionals, mainly from the business sector, representing 76% of the total. In terms of experience, the majority of respond-ents had more than 15 years of experience (42%), followed by those with 8-15 years (30%), 2-8 years (26%), and a minority with less than 2 years (2%). In terms of educational qualifications, most have a Master's degree (57%), followed by Bachelor's degree (26%), and 8% each have a PhD or other educational qualifications. Professionally, the experts were split between Transportation and Traffic Engineering (47%), Economics and Law (28%), and a combination of Civil, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering (6%), with the remainder (18%) coming from various other fields. Geographically, the vast majority were from Serbia (82%), with the reminder from Bosnia and Herzegovina (6%), Montenegro (4%), Macedonia (4%), and North Macedonia (2%).

The sample size for this study, comprising 49 experts mainly from the business sector in the Western Balkans, provides a statistically sound basis for the analysis conducted. While larger samples can often increase the generalizability of results, the sample size of nearly fifty professionals is adequate for complex multivariate techniques, especially when the respondents are subject matter experts. Given that these individuals bring a high level of domain-specific knowledge, their insights are likely to be particularly informative and nuanced, thereby increasing the relevance of the results. Furthermore, the homogeneity in the respondents in terms of their professional background and regional focus increases the contextual relevance of the study and makes it a valuable contribution to understanding the impact of transport and logistics trends in this specific economic and geographical milieu.”

7. The discussion section lacks insights into the limitations, applicability, and recommendations for future research based on the study's methodology.

Thank you very much for this comment. The entire subsection in the discussion section has been added:

4.4. Limitations, applicability, and recommendations for future research

“The main limitation of the study is the fact that the survey was only conducted among specific group of experts in a specific region. To improve the methodology, a Europe-wide survey could be conducted to allow comparisons based on different levels of infrastructure development. This survey should involve different stakeholders from the public and private sectors to understand the different perceptions that are crucial for the development of strategies and policies, practical solutions, and the implementation of new technologies and approaches.

Experts specializing in specific areas of transport (accidents, congestion, emissions) could deepen the study and provide a more detailed understanding of the significance of individual trends. The results of this study can serve as a basis and guide for further in-depth research.

Given the rapid development of technology and the fast pace at which new trends emerge, it is essential to constantly update the methodology to take into account of new, emerging trends and phase out those that have become established.

8. The conclusion should include more quantitative research findings and be more concise.

Thank you for this comment. Our aim was to draw brief and general conclusions. Since we have considerably improved the previous chapter, we hope you will agree to keep the conclusions more general.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the study titled "Impact of Transport Trends on Sustainability in the Western Balkans: A Future-Oriented Business Sector Perspective," the authors aim to understand the influence of new transport trends on sustainability in the Western Balkans, with a particular focus on the business sector's perspective in the context of the future.The research objective involves identifying potential benefits and challenges arising from emerging trends and assessing their impact on sustainability issues in the transportation sector. The research methodology relies on a survey conducted on the Mentimeter platform, with the participation of 49 experts from various fields related to transportation, logistics, urban planning, the environment, and policymaking. Unfortunately, the text lacks in-depth information about who these experts are and why precisely 49 respondents were chosen, raising questions about the sample's representativeness. The study's findings suggest that emerging trends have the potential to reduce accidents, congestion, and emissions while simultaneously increasing operating costs and infrastructure investments. Specifically, trends such as alternative fuels, electrification, and smart city initiatives are highlighted as crucial for emission reduction. However, it is worth noting that these results are based on subjective opinions of experts, and the absence of quantitative data introduces some uncertainty regarding representativeness and overall evidential strength.In conclusion, the study takes steps toward understanding the impact of new trends on sustainability in the Western Balkans; however, there is a lack of depth in the research methodology, which impacts a fuller understanding of who the experts are and their qualifications. Introducing a more detailed description of the methodology and providing information about the expert panel could enhance the study's robustness and credibility.

Author Response

Dear reviewer. Thank you very much for all your valuable comments. First of all, we would like to inform you that we have significantly improved the manuscript. Please refer to the revised version for the details.

With reference to your specific comments on the interviewees and their background, the following two paragraphs have been added to section 3 of the paper:

“The expert group was composed of 49 professionals, mainly from the business sector, representing 76% of the total. In terms of experience, the majority of respond-ents had more than 15 years of experience (42%), followed by those with 8-15 years (30%), 2-8 years (26%), and a minority with less than 2 years (2%). In terms of educational qualifications, most have a Master's degree (57%), followed by Bachelor's degree (26%), and 8% each have a PhD or other educational qualifications. Professionally, the experts were split between Transportation and Traffic Engineering (47%), Economics and Law (28%), and a combination of Civil, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering (6%), with the remainder (18%) coming from various other fields. Geographically, the vast majority were from Serbia (82%), with the reminder from Bosnia and Herzegovina (6%), Montenegro (4%), Macedonia (4%), and North Macedonia (2%).

The sample size for this study, comprising 49 experts mainly from the business sector in the Western Balkans, provides a statistically sound basis for the analysis conducted. While larger samples can often increase the generalizability of results, the sample size of nearly fifty professionals is adequate for complex multivariate techniques, especially when the respondents are subject matter experts. Given that these individuals bring a high level of domain-specific knowledge, their insights are likely to be particularly informative and nuanced, thereby increasing the relevance of the results. Furthermore, the homogeneity in the respondents in terms of their professional background and regional focus increases the contextual relevance of the study and makes it a valuable contribution to understanding the impact of transport and logistics trends in this specific economic and geographical milieu.”

Regarding the commentary on the credibility and objectivity of the results, please note that a new subsection has been added in section 4 comparing the results found in the literature and the results provided by the experts: The following is added:

“When synthesizing the comparative analysis between the literature review and the experts’ responses from, several key differences and similarities become apparent.

The literature review shows a broad spectrum of potential impacts across the transportation trends, with a focus on technological and infrastructural developments. The scientific discourse points to a comprehensive shift towards environmentally friendly technologies, highlighting a spectrum of outcomes from “Electrification”, “Digitization”, and “Automation”. The expert survey, on the other hand, shows more emphasises to the practical implications and real-world feasibility of these trends, particularly focusing on the immediate and tangible impacts such as emissions reductions and the need for extensive infrastructure investments. A clear difference is that the experts emphasise the immediate need for infrastructure investment to support the adoption of advanced transportation technologies. In the literature, this tends to be discussed in the context of long-term strategic planning, while the experts emphasise it as an urgent, near term concern, possibly reflecting their experience on-the-ground and their direct involvement with the current state of the sector.

Both the literature and the expert survey agree that the advanced technologies play an important role of in the transformation of the transportation sector. There is a consensus that trends such as “Intelligent Transport Systems”, “Smart Cities and Communities”, and “Digitization” have the potential to significantly reduce congestion and emissions. This consensus underlines the collective recognition of the value that these technologies have in creating more sustainable and efficient transportation systems. Another similarity is the recognition of the environmental benefits of the transition to “Alternative Fuels” and “Electrification”. Both sources agree that these trends are capable of reducing emissions, which is critical to achieving sustainability goals in transportation.”

Finally, we would like to point out that the survey with the Mentimeter tool was carried out in the presence of all the experts at a conference on transport issues. At the workshop, the experts were presented with the approaches and trends. They then used the Mentimeter app to give their opinion on the future impact of the trends on different aspects of transport. In particular, we would like to draw your attention to Appendix 1, where the Mentimeter results are presented graphically.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Brief summary

Research illustrates the main trends that could drive the development of a sustainable transport system in the Western Balkans. The main goal of the research is to understand how the trends identified and explained in the literature overview will affect congestion, accidents, emissions, operational costs and infrastructure investments. The Authors suveyed a group of 49 professionals that were asked to evaluate potential impact on congestion, accidents, emissions, operational costs and infrastructure investment for the period until 2030 on a scale of -3 to 3.

Drawing on the results of the descriptive analysis, the Authors emphasise the need for strategic investment and policy adjustment to ensure that the transition to an advanced transportation framework is environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable. Specifically, trends related to green technologies and new infrastructures promise significant improvements in emissions reduction, safety, and congestion management, but they also entail considerations of higher operational costs and significant infrastructure investments.

Broad comments

Research is of potential interest to the readership of the Journal, but the manuscript needs further quality improvements.

In the introduction, I suggest to explicitly state the research gap (lack of regional analyses) and the research goal (analyze the impact of emerging transport trends in Western Balkans).

Section 2 is too long and repetitive. I suggest to summarize the results of the literature overview in two tables: the first one highlighting opportunities and threats of each trend, and the second one highlighting with a checklist for each aspect analyzed the trends that are affected (as in the heatmap presented in Figure 2 and 3).   

In Section 3 the subsection 3.2 is too compressed. I suggest either to further expand this section presenting the full results of the factor analysis, either to delete it and use the empirical evidence built in further research.

In Section 4, results are not compared to those illustrated in other papers from other Authors. I suggest to expand this section by comparing the results achieved with those one obtained by the Authors mentioned in the literature overview.

The final part of Section 5 is only drafted (future direction and summary). Authors are invited to add few sentences concerning research limitation and to further expand the paragraphs concerning future directions and summary.

Minor comments 

Few typos apart (line 61: the study "is" focuses; line 539: the importance of "understading" transport trends) and the drafted part of Section 5 (Line 622: "Future directions: To improve" and line 635: "In summary: This study provides"), I have no minor comments to add.

  

 

 

Author Response

REVIEWER 3

Brief summary

Research illustrates the main trends that could drive the development of a sustainable transport system in the Western Balkans. The main goal of the research is to understand how the trends identified and explained in the literature overview will affect congestion, accidents, emissions, operational costs and infrastructure investments. The Authors suveyed a group of 49 professionals that were asked to evaluate potential impact on congestion, accidents, emissions, operational costs and infrastructure investment for the period until 2030 on a scale of -3 to 3.

Drawing on the results of the descriptive analysis, the Authors emphasise the need for strategic investment and policy adjustment to ensure that the transition to an advanced transportation framework is environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable. Specifically, trends related to green technologies and new infrastructures promise significant improvements in emissions reduction, safety, and congestion management, but they also entail considerations of higher operational costs and significant infrastructure investments.

Broad comments

Research is of potential interest to the readership of the Journal, but the manuscript needs further quality improvements.

In the introduction, I suggest to explicitly state the research gap (lack of regional analyses) and the research goal (analyze the impact of emerging transport trends in Western Balkans).

Thank you for this comment. Two additional paragraphs have been added to the introduction. I hope this is more in line with what you suggest.

“Despite the momentum of global initiatives to improve transport systems, their regional impact needs to be carefully analysed. As Europe sets out to put these trans-formative strategies into action, it becomes clear that the impact and feasibility of these initiatives can vary greatly from region to region, as each region has its own unique challenges and contexts [13]. This brings us to the specific focus of our study: the Western Balkans. Distinct in its geographical and socio-economic characteristics, the Western Balkans is an important area for analysing the implementation and effectiveness of EU transport policy. Our analysis aims to shed light on how the Western Balkans, with its strategic importance and specific needs, can adapt to and benefit from the EU's vision for a sustainable transport future”.

“As can be seen, the Western Balkans face many challenges and are therefore worth to be considered as a study case in the field of transport sector. Many researchers have dealt with transport issues in this region, but none of them from the perspective of emerging trends especially from the perspective of business sector. It has been shown that business stakeholders have advanced understanding of emerging technologies and their likely impacts, as well as strategic practices which could be of great benefit for policy making [22]. Their opinion is often not taken into account in this very demanding process. For this study, a comprehensive but straight forward methodology was developed to gather stakeholders opinion and assess the most promising trends that could drive the development of a sustainable transport system in the Western Balkans. In this way, we provide, for the first time, a comprehensive overview of the expected impact of emerging trends on emissions, congestion, accidents, operational cost and infrastructure investments, which can inform decision-makers and make an important contribution to the discourse on sustainable transport from a regional perspective.”

Section 2 is too long and repetitive. I suggest to summarize the results of the literature overview in two tables: the first one highlighting opportunities and threats of each trend, and the second one highlighting with a checklist for each aspect analyzed the trends that are affected (as in the heatmap presented in Figure 2 and 3).   

 

Thank you for this comment. Section 2 has been completely restructured according to your suggestion. Please read the revised version of the paper to see all the changes.

In Section 3 the subsection 3.2 is too compressed. I suggest either to further expand this section presenting the full results of the factor analysis, either to delete it and use the empirical evidence built in further research.

Thank you for this comment. Section 3 has been considerably expanded in line with your suggestion. Statistical evidence is, in our opinion, urgently needed to show credibility. Please read the revised version of the paper to see all the changes.

In Section 4, results are not compared to those illustrated in other papers from other Authors. I suggest to expand this section by comparing the results achieved with those one obtained by the Authors mentioned in the literature overview.

Thank you for this comment. A new subsection is added to section 4 to clarify the issue of comparison of results. The following is added:

“When synthesizing the comparative analysis between the literature review and the experts’ responses from, several key differences and similarities become apparent.

The literature review shows a broad spectrum of potential impacts across the transportation trends, with a focus on technological and infrastructural developments. The scientific discourse points to a comprehensive shift towards environmentally friendly technologies, highlighting a spectrum of outcomes from “Electrification”, “Digitization”, and “Automation”. The expert survey, on the other hand, shows more emphasises to the practical implications and real-world feasibility of these trends, particularly focusing on the immediate and tangible impacts such as emissions reductions and the need for extensive infrastructure investments. A clear difference is that the experts emphasise the immediate need for infrastructure investment to support the adoption of advanced transportation technologies. In the literature, this tends to be discussed in the context of long-term strategic planning, while the experts emphasise it as an urgent, near term concern, possibly reflecting their experience on-the-ground and their direct involvement with the current state of the sector.

Both the literature and the expert survey agree that the advanced technologies play an important role of in the transformation of the transportation sector. There is a consensus that trends such as “Intelligent Transport Systems”, “Smart Cities and Communities”, and “Digitization” have the potential to significantly reduce congestion and emissions. This consensus underlines the collective recognition of the value that these technologies have in creating more sustainable and efficient transportation systems. Another similarity is the recognition of the environmental benefits of the transition to “Alternative Fuels” and “Electrification”. Both sources agree that these trends are capable of reducing emissions, which is critical to achieving sustainability goals in transportation.”

The final part of Section 5 is only drafted (future direction and summary). Authors are invited to add few sentences concerning research limitation and to further expand the paragraphs concerning future directions and summary.

Thank you for this comment. At the suggestion of another reviewer, we have included limitations, applicability and recommendations for future research in section 4. We sincerely hope that this is okay with you too?

The following has been added:

“4.4. Limitations, applicability, and recommendations for future research

“The main limitation of the study is the fact that the survey was only conducted among specific group of experts in a specific region. To improve the methodology, a Europe-wide survey could be conducted to allow comparisons based on different levels of infrastructure development. This survey should involve different stakeholders from the public and private sectors to understand the different perceptions that are crucial for the development of strategies and policies, practical solutions, and the implementation of new technologies and approaches.

Experts specializing in specific areas of transport (accidents, congestion, emissions) could deepen the study and provide a more detailed understanding of the significance of individual trends. The results of this study can serve as a basis and guide for further in-depth research.

Given the rapid development of technology and the fast pace at which new trends emerge, it is essential to constantly update the methodology to take into account of new, emerging trends and phase out those that have become established.”

Minor comments 

Few typos apart (line 61: the study "is" focuses; line 539: the importance of "understading" transport trends) and the drafted part of Section 5 (Line 622: "Future directions: To improve" and line 635: "In summary: This study provides"), I have no minor comments to add.

Thank you very much also for this minor comments. We have corrected these errors.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First of all, I appreciate the opportunity to review the paper Impact of Transport Trends on Sustainability in the Western Balkans: A Future-Oriented Business Sector Perspective.  The paper deals with a very interesting problem.

The paper is well-written and well-organized. The most important parts of the paper are properly done. However, some suggestions are below.

·        You have a relatively small sample, less than 50. The structure of such a small sample is very important for results reliability. It is very important to give the structure for all criteria: gender, education, years of experience, country (number of experts per country), position/profession, education, etc.

·        Do you have university professors in the sample?

·        This is not enough: “The expert group consisted of 49 professionals from various fields related to transport, logistics, urban planning, environment, and policymaking. The group brought together a rich mix of educational backgrounds and professional expertise, thereby ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted issues at stake”

·        This kind of paper must show questionnaire with all questions! This is very important for readers and also reviewers. 

·        Theoretical and Practical Implications should be stronger and with more details.

·        Applied/Used tests must be strongly augmented. There are also different/other tests?

·        Limitations in Conclusions are missing

·        Future research directions must be enhanced.

Suggested references

Roy, S., Vulevic, A., Hore, S., Chaberek, G., & Mitra, S. (2023). Regional Classification of Serbian Railway Transport System Through Efficient Synthetic Indicator. Mechatron. Intell Transp. Syst., 2(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.56578/mits020101

 

Aytekin, A., Korucuk, S., & Karamaşa, Ç. (2023). Ranking Countries According to Logistics and International Trade Efficiencies via REF-III. J. Intell. Manag. Decis., 2(2), 74-84. https://doi.org/10.56578/jimd020204

Comments on the Quality of English Language

.

Author Response

REVIEWER 4

First of all, I appreciate the opportunity to review the paper Impact of Transport Trends on Sustainability in the Western Balkans: A Future-Oriented Business Sector Perspective.  The paper deals with a very interesting problem.

The paper is well-written and well-organized. The most important parts of the paper are properly done. However, some suggestions are below.

• You have a relatively small sample, less than 50. The structure of such a small sample is very important for results reliability. It is very important to give the structure for all criteria: gender, education, years of experience, country (number of experts per country), position/profession, education, etc.
• Do you have university professors in the sample?
• This is not enough: “The expert group consisted of 49 professionals from various fields related to transport, logistics, urban planning, environment, and policymaking. The group brought together a rich mix of educational backgrounds and professional expertise, thereby ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted issues at stake”

Dear reviewer. Thank you very much for all your valuable comments. First of all, we would like to inform you that we have made many improvements to our work. Please read the revised version to see these changes.

With reference to a specific comment dealing with the sample and respondent structure, the following two paragraphs have been added to section 3:

“The expert group was composed of 49 professionals, mainly from the business sector, representing 76% of the total. In terms of experience, the majority of respond-ents had more than 15 years of experience (42%), followed by those with 8-15 years (30%), 2-8 years (26%), and a minority with less than 2 years (2%). In terms of educational qualifications, most have a Master's degree (57%), followed by Bachelor's degree (26%), and 8% each have a PhD or other educational qualifications. Professionally, the experts were split between Transportation and Traffic Engineering (47%), Economics and Law (28%), and a combination of Civil, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering (6%), with the remainder (18%) coming from various other fields. Geographically, the vast majority were from Serbia (82%), with the reminder from Bosnia and Herzegovina (6%), Montenegro (4%), Macedonia (4%), and North Macedonia (2%).

The sample size for this study, comprising 49 experts mainly from the business sector in the Western Balkans, provides a statistically sound basis for the analysis conducted. While larger samples can often increase the generalizability of results, the sample size of nearly fifty professionals is adequate for complex multivariate techniques, especially when the respondents are subject matter experts. Given that these individuals bring a high level of domain-specific knowledge, their insights are likely to be particularly informative and nuanced, thereby increasing the relevance of the results. Furthermore, the homogeneity in the respondents in terms of their professional background and regional focus increases the contextual relevance of the study and makes it a valuable contribution to understanding the impact of transport and logistics trends in this specific economic and geographical milieu.”

• This kind of paper must show questionnaire with all questions! This is very important for readers and also reviewers. 

Thank you for this comment. In this case, too, we have made some improvements in section 3. The methodology is now explained in more detail. Please note that the survey was conducted using the Mentimeter tool with all experts present. They were first presented with the trends and then used the Mentimeter app to give their opinion on the future impact of the trends on different aspects of transport. We would like to draw your attention in particular to Appendix 1, in which the Mentimeter results are presented graphically.

• Theoretical and Practical Implications should be stronger and with more details.
• Applied/Used tests must be strongly augmented. There are also different/other tests?

Thank you for both comments. On this basis, we have significantly improved section 3.2, in particular 3.2.1 Statistical relevance of the results and 3.2.5 Interpretation of the relationship map. Several changes have been made, so please consult the previously mentioned sections to see the improvements.

• Limitations in Conclusions are missing
• Future research directions must be enhanced.

Thank you for this comment. At the suggestion of another reviewer, we have included limitations, applicability and recommendations for future research in section 4. We sincerely hope that this is okay with you?

The following was added:

“4.4. Limitations, applicability, and recommendations for future research

“The main limitation of the study is the fact that the survey was only conducted among specific group of experts in a specific region. To improve the methodology, a Europe-wide survey could be conducted to allow comparisons based on different levels of infrastructure development. This survey should involve different stakeholders from the public and private sectors to understand the different perceptions that are crucial for the development of strategies and policies, practical solutions, and the implementation of new technologies and approaches.

Experts specializing in specific areas of transport (accidents, congestion, emissions) could deepen the study and provide a more detailed understanding of the significance of individual trends. The results of this study can serve as a basis and guide for further in-depth research.

Given the rapid development of technology and the fast pace at which new trends emerge, it is essential to constantly update the methodology to take into account of new, emerging trends and phase out those that have become established.”

Suggested references

Roy, S., Vulevic, A., Hore, S., Chaberek, G., & Mitra, S. (2023). Regional Classification of Serbian Railway Transport System Through Efficient Synthetic Indicator. Mechatron. Intell Transp. Syst., 2(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.56578/mits020101

 

Aytekin, A., Korucuk, S., & Karamaşa, Ç. (2023). Ranking Countries According to Logistics and International Trade Efficiencies via REF-III. J. Intell. Manag. Decis., 2(2), 74-84. https://doi.org/10.56578/jimd020204

Thank you very much for this comment. Both references have been taken into consideration and added.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the author's careful revision. All my concerns have been fully responded and I think it can be published in the current form.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Fine.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper should be accepted for publication. Congratulations!

Comments on the Quality of English Language

.