-
QUESTION
crituque 4
SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION: AIRSHIPS VERSUS JET AIRPLANES (case bank p37)
Think about Abstract, strengths, opportunity or weakness and what you learn about the case, there are some questions be listed as below. Thinks about them and select 2 to 3 questions to answer for each part. (you do not need to answer all of them)
Abstract
An abstract is an encapsulation of the paper:
What is the paper about (scope)?
Did they identify a problem (economic, logistical, etc.)
What did the author(s) want to do (objectives)?
How did they go about doing it (methodology)?
What evidence did they use in the analysis?
What did they find (conclusion)?Paper’s Strengths
Here are some questions you can consider as you prepare the critique of the paper:Is the article well written and easily understood with clear objectives and reasonable conclusions?
Does the author(s) address a tangible problem in society and provide an insightful discussion?
Does the author(s) present convincing data and other evidence to support their position?
Is the methodology technically sound and appropriate for the data collected?
Does the author(s) make a useful contribution to the knowledge of transportation and could it have long term value?
Does the author(s) make good use of the diagrams, figures or data to support their arguments? Are any missing, that should be there?
Do the conclusions flow from the material presented in the paper?
How could the paper be made even stronger?Opportunities for Improvement
Weaknesses
Here are some questions you can consider as you prepare the critique of the paper:Is the article well written and easily understood with clear objectives and reasonable conclusions?
Does the author(s) address a tangible problem in society and provide an insightful discussion?
Does the author(s) present convincing data and other evidence to support their position?
Is the methodology technically sound and appropriate for the data collected?
Does the author(s) make a useful contribution to the knowledge of transportation and could it have long term value?
Does the author(s) make good use of the diagrams, figures or data to support their arguments? Are any missing, that should be there?
Do the conclusions flow from the material presented in the paper?
How would you recommend that the author(s) could improve the paper?What did you learn?
This is your opportunity to assess the intrinsic value of the paper from your own perspective.
What surprised you most?
Did anything challenge your prior impressions?
Did you learn anything about organizing a paper, or what to avoid?
Are you convinced by the analysis, or skeptical of its validity?Grade for this paper?
A B C or D
| Subject | Economics | Pages | 4 | Style | APA |
|---|
Answer
-
-
Paper Critique
Abstract
The paper is a case study comparing the sustainable transportation mechanisms between cargo airship and jet airplanes. The researchers identified an economic issue by evaluating a cargo airship's competency level that delivers fuel to multiple remote communities in Northwest Ontario and Manitoba. The authors' main objective was to assess whether cargo airships are sustainable enough to offer a year-round supply and lower total operation and management costs.
Paper's Strengths
The article is written clearly and easily understood with clear objectives and reasonable conclusions. It analyzes vast commercial collaborations between various carriers and how these approaches enhance sustainability. The authors offer a real issue in society and further provides an insightful discussion on the contemporary costs of transporting and storing diesel and gasoline to serve communities in almost-inaccessible regions. The paper used a comparative analysis method based on a documentary approach, which is technically sound and practical for the collected information.
Opportunities for Improvement
The information captured in the article offers vital contributions to the knowledge of transportation. It could bring long term value on the best sustainable measures to implement in the transportation, airline, and energy industries. However, although the summary details flow from the article's material, the authors could improve their paper by separating the studies into portions for better analysis. Focusing on one case study or state would help improve the readability and comprehension of the paper details.
From my perspective, the paper offers intrinsic value to readers. What surprised me most is the cost that airships incur when transporting energy products to remote areas and how far different approaches can affect a company's sustainability threshold. The information in the article challenged my initial impressions. Previously, I had no idea concerning the need to balance transport logistics without affecting returns in revenue for firms, hence, destabilizing their economic muscle. The analysis also expounded my knowledge on strategies of organizing a paper and what to avoid when doing research.
-
References