Making a Case for the Adoption of Industry 4.0 Technologies for Sustainable Housing Delivery in Saudi Arabia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a well-written research paper discussing the suitability of specific advanced digital technologies by the residential construction sector of Saudi Arabia and the benefits stemming from the adoption of these technologies. The research is based on a comprehensive review of relevant literature and a survey of industry-specific professionals, experts, and other stakeholders based in Riyadh.

The manuscript is well-developed for publication provided the deficiencies listed below are addressed.

Introduction: The context (urbanisation and demography-specific housing problems) is well described, but I think the sentences about the concept of housing, especially lines 41-45 are too schoolish, I would eliminate them. By contrast I would provide a definition for sustainable housing right in the introduction.

This definition is missing from the paper and often referred to only partially. Indeed, while in section 2, the authors elaborate on the TBL concept of sustainability, sustainable housing is often referred to in a confusing way. Sometimes it refers to affordability, sometimes to economic concepts such as costs and the related environmental ones (less waste).

I think, a proper definition should be provided at the outset (transfer the relevant paragraphs from section 2 and summarise the definition properly), and throughout the paper it should always be explained which aspect of sustainability is discussed in the given paragraphs.

Another issue is that the mentioned advanced technologies are related both to construction technology (housing delivery) and smart home technology with reference to occupants’ wellbeing (e.g. lines 520-525). I think the authors should clarify this broad purview, since occupants’ wellbeing is not closely related to sustainable housing.

Literature review: The current review contains a lot of unnecessary, hardly related elements e.g. lines 152-163. Instead, I would dedicate more space to the developments in ‘par excellence’ construction technology (earlier the description of the evolution of manufacturing is also schoolish and unnecessary) and elaborate more on factors influencing adoption. The authors touch upon this topic (lines 189-202) in terms of misallocation of resources, resistance to change, etc. Develop this part, in terms of resource complementarities, technology acceptance, organisational, skill-related and managerial contingencies etc. you can read about this e.g., in Szalavetz, A. (2022). Digitalisation-induced performance improvement: Don't take it for granted! Acta Oeconomica, 72(4), 457-475. These details are all the more important, since in the concluding section you recommend training programmes and capacity building initiatives: the mentioned theoretical lenses could be well associated with your recommendations.

Results: The result section is well developed; my only criticism is that you make reference only to the literature. You consulted a great number of professionals, their views are not represented in the paper: you should consider adding some real-world empirics.

Conclusions: Here, I recommend returning to the definition of sustainable housing delivery and summarising your opinion about whether the mentioned advanced technologies can indeed solve problems such as “overcrowding, pollution, and high rental costs.”

Some minor editing may improve the text. Line 56: attributed to poor affordable housing strategies from the government

I think you wanted to write here: attributed to the fact that the  government failed to develop and execute an affordable housing strategy for the poor.

Line 259, again: Riyadh has experienced one of the highest rates of poor sustainable housing delivery: this is not what you wanted to write is it? Maybe: lowest rate of sustainable housing delivery for the poor?

Author Response

Greetings and thanks for your feedback.

Please find attached the reply of the reviewer’s comments.

Regards,

Abdullah

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study was aimed at evaluating suitable 4IR technologies for housing delivery and the benefits of adopting the technologies for sustainable housing delivery. This paper is rigorous in writing, reasonable in structure, interesting in research, and meaningful in conclusion. But there are still the following problems :

1. How to control the quality of quantitative analysis in this paper? How to ensure the reliability and validity of the questionnaire? Has a pre-survey been conducted ?

2. The innovation and research significance of this paper are slightly thin. In the second chapter, the author mentioned 'Unfortunately, there is still a gap in literatures and practice concerning the benefits of integrating 4IR technologies for sustainable housing delivery in KSA '.What are the differences between KSA and other countries ( regions ) ? How is it different from other countries ( regions ) where population growth and urban expansion have led to housing tensions ?

3. For the format problem, 440 lines should be ' 4.3. Benefits of Integrating the 4IR Technologies for Housing Delivery in KSA ' ; for the first time in the text, the full name is used and the abbreviation is used later. There are many times in the text that the full name and the abbreviation are used alternately.

4. References are older. Industry 4.0 technology is mostly after 2013, and a new generation of industrial technology has been developed in recent years. The number of literatures in the past three years should be increased. At the same time, this article will be more interesting if we can discuss the heterogeneous role of the original Industry 4.0 technology and the new generation of technology in achieving sustainable housing delivery in KSA.

5. It is recommended to put the chart into the text. If it cannot be displayed in the text due to space limitations, then it should be explained in the footnote ' due to space limitations, see Appendix '.

Final opinion : major revision

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

Greetings and thanks for your feedback.

Please find attached the reply of the reviewer’s comments.

Regards,

Abdullah

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

no

no

Author Response

Greetings and thanks for your feedback.

Please find attached our reply to the reviewer's comments.


Regards,
Abdullah

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf