Small-Scale Fishing and Sustainability. An Ethnographic Approach to the Case of Self-Employed Fishermen in the South-East of Spain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. I would suggest the author apply these chapters to organize this paper. Chapter 1 Introduction; Chapter 2 Literature Review; Chapter 3 Method; Chapter 4 Results; Chapter 5 Implications; Chapter 6 Conclusions; and References. In the present version, I think this might confuse the readers.
2. The three main criteria for this manuscript are (a) quality and content of the research/review; (b) Quality, brevity, and clarity of presentation; (c) Significance, relevance, and timeliness of the topic. In addition, this title is (i) coverage of the literature/significant developments in the field or clarity of discussion within an emerging topic; (ii) originality, new perspectives or insights; (iii) international interest; and (iv) relevance for governance, policy or practical perspectives relevant to the focus of this manuscript. However, this study is lacking most of the important criteria. Hence, I think the author needs to consider these criteria before your submission.
3. Please make sure that a competent editor checks the English. Use of the first person (“I”, “we”, etc.) and third-person ("he", "she" etc) must be avoided.
4. The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions.
5. Please underscore the scientific value-added of your paper in your abstract and introduction.
6. The introduction should be clearly stated research questions and targets first. Then answer several questions: Why is the topic important (or why do you study on it)? What are research questions? What has been studied? What are your contributions? Why is it to propose this particular method? An outline of the paper can also be included. Please build upon the great work we have published on these subjects.
7. The major defect of this study is the debate or Argument is not clearly stated in the introduction session. Hence, the contribution is weak in this manuscript. I would suggest the author to enhance your theoretical discussion and arrives at your debate or argument.
8. The literature review is necessary for you to clarify the “contribution” of your study. In the current form, there are no pieces of literature to support your study. The author failed to present the study debates and failed to discuss the debates. In general, the author should present the specific debate for your study.
9.  I would request the author to cite more solid evidences for this study. In addition, the Literature review is comprehensive to demonstrate the understanding of the background studies. For instance, “Bai et al.(2011) presented ………..”.  “Chen et al. (2005) also showed ………” The controversy is ………
10. Please explain the tables in more detail and interpreted what those tables presented.
11. Please explain your results into steps and links to your proposed method.
12. I would like to request the author to emphasize the contributions practically and academically in the implications section.
13. Please make sure your conclusions section underscores the scientific value-added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Please revise your conclusion part into more detail.  Basically, you should enhance your contributions, limitations, underscore the scientific value-added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results and future study in this session.

Author Response

Please, see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

From my point of view, I consider that the authors solve most of the points of concerns raised by me. However, I believe that there are still minor issues to be solved by the authors, regarding the connections between small-scale fishing and sustainability. The authors must introduce more relevant papers in the field, especially from MDPI journals:

1. Deb, A.K.; Haque, C.E. ‘Sufferings Start from the Mothers’ Womb’: Vulnerabilities and Livelihood War of the Small-Scale Fishers of Bangladesh. Sustainability2011, 3, 2500-2527.
2. Ceptureanu, S.I.; Ceptureanu, E.G.; Bogdan, V.L.; Radulescu, V. Sustainability Perceptions in Romanian Non-Profit Organizations: An Exploratory Study Using Success Factor Analysis. Sustainability2018, 10, 294.
3. Fabiola V. Miranda, Wolfgang B. Stotz, Why do state interventions in artisanal fisheries often fail in Chile? Misalignment to the way of life of fishers,Marine Policy,Volume 132, 2021,104693,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104693.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your comments. We have included the following papers you suggested (64, 65, rspectevly):

• Deb, A.K.; Haque, C.E. ‘Sufferings Start from the Mothers’ Womb’: Vulnerabilities and Livelihood War of the Small-Scale Fishers of Bangladesh. Sustainability2011, 3, 2500-2527.
• Fabiola V. Miranda, Wolfgang B. Stotz, Why do state interventions in artisanal fisheries often fail in Chile? Misalignment to the way of life of fishers,Marine Policy,Volume 132, 2021,104693,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104693.

Kind regards

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript can be considered for publication.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments. We are glad that you consider that our paper meets the conditions to be published.

Best regards