Study on Sustainable Development Strategy of Rural E-Commerce in the Northeast of China—A Case Study of 11 Villages, 11 Towns and 4 Counties

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.      The subject of the article is not groundbreaking, although it is important from a practical point of view. I have some questions and suggestions to all authors, which are pointed below.

2.      Why were five experts selected in the judgment matrix and not a different number of experts? How was the research sample made?

3.      I would like to ask you for additional justification of the research sample with regard to the population and representativeness in the research.

4.      The article indicates a practical, not a research gap. In my opinion, this is a practical and not a scientific problem, which may in advance undermine the legitimacy of the article - I am asking for additional explanations on this issue, supported by scientific literature and research results to date - which is currently missing.

5.      The article did not specify and at the same time did not emphasize the scientific purpose, and did not refer to it in the summary, referring also to the research conducted so far in this field.

6.      The problem identified in the research may be common, why have the authors not referred to other practices in this benchmarking in terms of some solutions, or at least not reviewed them?

7.      The article is written correctly in terms of research, although the methods of reaching the goal are not sophisticated.

8.      The last publication on the bibliography list is not well-edited.

9.      In my opinion, the article has great potential, but the novelty of work is not emphasized in it, which significantly reduces the value of the work.

10.   The article requires numerous additions, but after its completion it is suitable for publication. I wish the authors persistence in making changes and quick publication.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a well written paper, with some robust argumentation.

I have to make three major comments:

1.      Given the scope of the journal, the authors should place the whole discussion of e-commerce and the agricultural development under the notion of sustainable development. In this vein, a short discussion of the term should be provided in the introduction. See (a) Manolis Manioudis & Giorgos Meramveliotakis (2022) Broad strokes towards a grand theory in the analysis of sustainable development: a return to the classical political economy, New Political Economy, DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2022.2038114  and (b) Tomislav, K. (2018). The concept of sustainable development: From its beginning to the contemporary issues. Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 21(1), 67-94.

2.      Conclusions are not included. Thus, a distinct section of conclusions should be written and section 7 (Limitations) should be included within.

3.      I would like to see a shorten version of the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

glad to see the authors accommodate most of my comments. However, they did not include all the references that I have suggested. Thus, I strongly recommend the following reference to be included as well:

Manioudis, M., & Meramveliotakis, G. (2022). Broad strokes towards a grand theory in the analysis of sustainable development: A return to the classical political economy. New Political Economy, 1-13.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf