Airbnb Host’s Perspectives on Climate Change: Wildfire Threats to Rural Tourism

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article entitled “Airbnb Host’s Perspectives on Climate Change: Wildfire Threats to Rural Tourism” is written very well and according to the journal's scope. I want to recommend minor changes before the final acceptance of the article.

Minor revisions:

1. I suggest following literature [1,2] to study weather events and if you want to update the given sentence in the second paragraph of the literature review as

“These gases trap heat, causing a warming of the atmosphere, which in turn increases the water temperature in the oceans, resulting in a change of weather patterns and an increase in extreme weather events across the globe, and ultimately it negatively impacts on ecology [1,2]”

[1] Changes in risk of extreme weather events in Europe

[2] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk. Technovation. Volume 117, 102255

2. I can understand that the provided citations of the studies, in conclusion, might be important. However, please remove these citations from the conclusion section and adjust these studies in the Results and discussion section.              

3. Please add the main limitations and recommendations for future studies at the end of the conclusion.

Overall, I like the study very much and wish you good luck with the publication.

Author Response

 I suggest following literature [1,2] to study weather events and if you want to update the given sentence in the second paragraph of the literature review as

“These gases trap heat, causing a warming of the atmosphere, which in turn increases the water temperature in the oceans, resulting in a change of weather patterns and an increase in extreme weather events across the globe, and ultimately it negatively impacts on ecology [1,2]”

[1] Changes in risk of extreme weather events in Europe I am not sure what you are asking. I believe the threat of extreme weather events are global, not limited to Europe. Are you asking me to limit it to Europe?

[2] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk. Technovation. Volume 117, 102255. This has been added

2. I can understand that the provided citations of the studies, in conclusion, might be important. However, please remove these citations from the conclusion section and adjust these studies in the Results and discussion section. Based on feedback from other reviewers, I have changed this section to Discussion and added a new Conclusion. I hope this addresses your issue with citations in this section
3. Please add the main limitations and recommendations for future studies at the end of the conclusion. Done

Overall, I like the study very much and wish you good luck with the publication. Thank you!

Reviewer 2 Report

I have a few recommendations>

1. In the abstract, you start with the method. Try to respect the traditional structure of an abstract. Present the aim and objectives of the paper. Include the method you used and in the end present briefly the results. 

2. It would have been easier to follow the template. Check the guidelines for references in the text. when you put the number of the page, it is [1] (p. 1044). Check the entire paper. 

3. In the method you have presented the years in operation for the hosts. Discuss in the Discussion section or in Conclusion how this influences your research and the hosts perspective. If there is a limit, state it as such. 

4. Also, I did not understand what is the average of years in operation in the region. Explain that in the paper to see if the people you interviewed are positioning in comparison. 

5. Results and Discussion should be separated. For qualitative research, you should introduce in the Method part some research question and after presenting the results of the interviews, you discuss the answers you got for the research questions in the Discussion section.

6. In conclusion, add short paragraphs about theoretical and practical implications, limitations of your study and future research direction. Also, the references that show consistency with your paper should be moved in the Discussion. 

7. After you add the research questions, you can add a few more references in the Discussion to highlight if other studied were similar or not in their findings. 

Author Response

1. In the abstract, you start with the method. Try to respect the traditional structure of an abstract. Present the aim and objectives of the paper. Include the method you used and in the end present briefly the results. Done
2. It would have been easier to follow the template. Check the guidelines for references in the text. when you put the number of the page, it is [1] (p. 1044). Check the entire paper. Done
3. In the method you have presented the years in operation for the hosts. Discuss in the Discussion section or in Conclusion how this influences your research and the hosts perspective. If there is a limit, state it as such. There are no comparisons made based on years in operation, therefore, I have removed this from the table.
4. Also, I did not understand what is the average of years in operation in the region. Explain that in the paper to see if the people you interviewed are positioning in comparison. There are no comparisons made based on years in operation, therefore, I have removed this from the table.
5. Results and Discussion should be separated. For qualitative research, you should introduce in the Method part some research question and after presenting the results of the interviews, you discuss the answers you got for the research questions in the Discussion section. This has been changed
6. In conclusion, add short paragraphs about theoretical and practical implications, limitations of your study and future research direction. Also, the references that show consistency with your paper should be moved in the Discussion. This has been done
7. After you add the research questions, you can add a few more references in the Discussion to highlight if other studied were similar or not in their findings. I have added Woosman and Kim, however, there are no other studies that assess the overall impact of wildfires. Specifically, the research measures economic impact, visitor perceptions, and corporate response. This paper does not measure these things.

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic is very interesting and in line with recent studies. 

The section “Conclusion” should provide this indication:

-are there any important limitations in your findings or methods used that point for the need of further research? (the section should mention some limitations of this work, as the authors do not mention any limitation) 

Author Response

The topic is very interesting and in line with recent studies. Thank you!

The section “Conclusion” should provide this indication: This has been completed

-are there any important limitations in your findings or methods used that point for the need of further research? (the section should mention some limitations of this work, as the authors do not mention any limitation) This has been added

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Authors,

the topic of the paper is interesting, however I was expecting to find also some information about the exact data e.g. tourist numbers – the described decrease associated with more frequent fires? the prognosed influence on the tourism in the near and far future periods? Was the interview conducted according to the same pattern in case of all participants? – the methods should be explained more specifically. Moreover the results should be stated more clearly and not only as a repetition of previous statements of the property owners.

I think it would be useful to add some information about this issues.

Author Response

the topic of the paper is interesting, however I was expecting to find also some information about the exact data e.g. tourist numbers – the described decrease associated with more frequent fires? the prognosed influence on the tourism in the near and far future periods? This information is not available at the local level. While there are yearly figures, there is nothing on a monthly basis that shows visitor statistics during the fire season. This is not uncommon in rural areas.

Was the interview conducted according to the same pattern in case of all participants? – the methods should be explained more specifically. This has been updated

Moreover the results should be stated more clearly and not only as a repetition of previous statements of the property owners. I think it would be useful to add some information about this issues. This has been done

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

1 The fourth heading is still Results and Discussion. You should delete Discussion there

2. Conclusions should better highlight:

a. the limits of the paper

b. the novelty and originality

c. theoretical and practical implications of your research

Also, more references are needed. Under 40, it is a low number for scientific papers. 

Great success in your career!

 

Author Response

1 The fourth heading is still Results and Discussion. You should delete Discussion there - Done

2. Conclusions should better highlight:
3. the limits of the paper - done
4. the novelty and originality – this is covered in the discussion. See the last paragraph of the discussion.
5. theoretical and practical implications of your research This is covered in the discussion (see the last paragraph of the discussion)

Also, more references are needed. Under 40, it is a low number for scientific papers. I do not think the addition of references in order to meet a threshold is appropriate. I added one reference in the conclusion related to the limitations of the study, but unless there is a topic that you feel should be included in the paper, which would require its own new references, this is all I am willing to add. This is an original study with limited prior research. The final reference count is 40.

Great success in your career! Thank you

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear Author,

Thank you for the responses. The present form is acceptable.

Author Response

Thank you for the responses. The present form is acceptable – Thank you.