Mapping the Field of Value Chain: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper. It is an interesting toping and I consider it fits to the journal.
I have just some suggestions:
In section 3.2. Selection of Database and Data Clean is recommended to introduce a figure to demonstrate how the filtering was done in order to obtain results, taking into account the terms sought: value chain, supply chain and global value chain
In the conclusions section it is recommended to draw a future direction of development of the analyzed field.
You can add some additional literature, like 10.15837/ijccc.2021.1.4120
Author Response
We wish to thank you for investing time and effort into reviewing the document and providing constructive and actionable feedback. We have carefully considered each comment and responded by revising the manuscript as suggested. Here are the responses to each comment in detail, and we appreciate the specific and actionable feedback.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author(s),
Thank you for the invaluable read. It is a very constructive written paper providing new insight. However, some of the sentences are too long. I recommend that follow KISS (Keep It Simple & Short) strategy, which means no more than 22 words in a sentence so that readers have ease of understanding.
Good luck.
Author Response
We wish to thank you for investing time and effort into reviewing the document and providing constructive and actionable feedback. We have carefully considered each comment and responded by revising the manuscript as suggested. Here are the responses to each comment in detail, and we appreciate the specific and actionable feedback.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
NA
Author Response
We wish to thank you for investing time and effort into reviewing the document. We appreciate your recognition of our work. We will continue to optimize this paper and improve its quality to respond to the opinions of all reviewers and editors.
Specifically, we have added some references and optimized the previous reference list to make reference and research more relevant.
Reviewer 4 Report
Accepted
Author Response
We wish to thank you for investing time and effort into reviewing the document. We appreciate your recognition of our work. We will continue to optimize this paper and improve its quality to respond to the opinions of all reviewers and editors.
Reviewer 5 Report
Unfortunately, the paper is not adequately based on theoretically interesting literature analysis, and the analysis is accidental and messy. Unfortunately, the application of sophisticated bibliometric analysis tools gave trivial and useless, mechanically extracted facts whose practical application is highly doubtful.
E.g.: from conclusions part the main conclusion: "the mainly conclusion 654" "From the research of different countries, the research papers of devel-656 oped economic countries such as USA and UK have the most published and cited times. 657 Marine policy, resources, conservation and recycling and world development are the jour-658 nals that publish the most articles related to the value chain."
Sorry, but the article must be improved essentially and totally!.
Author Response
We wish to thank you for investing time and effort into reviewing the document. We have carefully considered each comment and responded by revising the manuscript as suggested. Here are the responses to each comment in detail, and we appreciate the specific and actionable feedback.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 5 Report
The authors have improved the paper significantly, from technical point of view. But the main problem is that the findings are of the descriptive character. E.g., from the presented maps you can see interrelations of keywords, journals articles quantities growth, table with citations indexes, etcetera. All this information is easily available at the Web of Science. So the question, what is the scientific value of this paper, remains open.
Author Response
Thanks again for your comments which have helped us greatly to improve the presentation and increase the quality of our paper. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
