One Village One Product (OVOP)—A Rural Development Strategy and the Early Adaption in Vietnam, the Case of Quang Ninh Province
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
the topic of the paper is interesting, but there are some aspects that need to be improved:
the abstract should be reconsider: you should present the aim of the paper, methodology, main results and conclusions
a literature review section should be added (not mixed with the material and methods)
please clarify which was the research method, and which is the novelty of your study. how your results contribute to the state of fact?
the conclusions section is missing.
Good luck!
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
First of all, we would like to thank you very much for your careful reading, comments and suggestions for the manuscript. Based on these very useful ideas, we have already made the revision by a point-by-point response as in the attachment.
Once again, thank you very much!
Best regards,
Long
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper, in order to be published, must be strictly reviewed. In particular, the introduction must be broadened by including a more in-depth analysis of the dynamics of rural areas in both developed and less developed countries. The review of the literature must contain a more in-depth analysis of the models of endogenous rural development, considering also those applied in other parts of the world (in Europe for example). The discussion is very poor. It should be enriched with elements concerning the economic, social and environmental implications of adopting an endogenous rural development model (also to make the paper more appropriate to Sustainability journal)
Some concluding sentences should be added.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
First of all, I would like to thank you very much for your careful reading, comments and suggestions for the manuscript. Based on these very useful ideas, I have already made the revision for my manuscript by a point-by-point response as in the attachment.
Once again, thank you very much!
Best regards,
Long
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This article analyses the "One Village One product" (OVOP) programme , which has been recently applied in one province in the North of Vietnam. The conceptual approach behind this programme has been adopted in many other countries, such as China (where is born), Philippines, Malaysia, Indobesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Mongolia. Authors speak about a OVOP movement in Asia, very close to the concepts of sustainable endogenous development , well-developed and studied in Western countries, especially in European literature.
The topic treated by the article is quite interesting, but there are two main shortcomings:
1) social economic achievements are presented in a superficial way (which method has been used to calculate capital and employment effects? Are there other quantified effects? what does mean total registered capital? what are the income effects for farmers, cooperatives, households? why did selling prices increase in the 2014-2016 period? what are the services and products other than agricultural products that contributed to the rural economy? how much was spent by the OVOP programme in the province?)
2) the final paragraph "discussion" is very short and unfortunately says very few about non-quantified effects, such as: promoting creativity and capacity of local people, social capital, building new institutions and trust at local level. This analysis should be extended, because these are the key components of endogenous development model on which this experince is based.
Other minor comments and revisions:
- row 93: Friedman (2007) is not in the references
- row 125: "providing its value is increasingly developed", provided that its value is.....
- rows 132-133: "the movement could be happen by the localities" (????)
- rows 224-231: "OCOP Provincial Steering Committee: Standing vice Chairman of the provincial People's....." and so on. This is not a way of describing the institutional situation that fits to a scientific journal;
- rows 316-319: this text simply repeats what is in the table 2, without any comment. It can be omitted
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 3,
First of all, I would like to thank you very much for your careful reading, comments and suggestions for the manuscript. Based on these very useful ideas, I have already made the revision for my manuscript by a point-by-point response as in the attachment.
Once again, thank you very much!
Best regards,
Long
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear author/s,
thank you for the improved version of your manuscript.
I recommend you to mention the managerial implications of your results in the conclusion section.
Good luck!
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
Authors would like to thank you very much for your comments and suggestion! We made some revision based on that.
Please find in the attachment, the Response for Round 2!
May you have a nice day!
Best regards,
Long Hoang Thanh
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has been significantly improved. I suggest the authors to better clarify the lines 113-114. The Leader is not a punctual initiative. It started as an EU initiative but then it has been a local development method which has been used for 20 years to engage local actors in the design and delivery of strategies, decision-making and resource allocation for the development of their rural areas. Now it is an integral part of the rural development plans implemented all around Europe.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
Authors would like to thank you very much for your useful comments and suggestion for the manuscript. We made some revision based on that.
Please find in the attachment, the Response for Round 2!
May you have a nice day!
Best regards,
Long Hoang Thanh
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Authors have worked on the previous version and enhanced the presentation of results, although the methodological background is quite insufficient. A more robust methodology is required for the next steps of this study.
Two minor revisions can be suggested:
- the literature quoted on the LEADER programme is very old and some more recent and updated articles/reports can be mentioned. Leader programme has been for many years an important approach implemented in rural development policies in the EU, not only in UK;
- the monetary values in NVD do not mean anything for the average reader, they should be presented also in dollars or Euros.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 3,
Authors would like to thank you very much for your useful comments and suggestion. We made some revision based on that.
Please find in the attachment, the Response for Round 2!
May you have a nice day!
Best regards,
Long Hoang Thanh
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
