‘The Forgotten Sector’: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium-Technology Innovation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read and review this interesting paper.

This paper touches upon a very important and current topic. Please find below my comments:

1. The introduction part of the paper is a bit lengthy. Consider how the main discussion could be made more concise.
2. The conclusions sections appear a bit abrupt. Consider how it could be deepened and made more reflective. Especially the paragraph on the study's contributions is very short.
3. I was missing a clear theoretical definition of the concept "low-tech (LT) and low-to-medium tech (LT/LMT)" already in the introduction section.

Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on this paper.

Author Response

We all are thankful for your time and giving relevant and useful suggestions on our manuscript. We strongly believe after incorporating comments, our papers has improved substantially and looks promising.  We would like give you response to you each comment one by one. 

Comment -  1The introduction part of the paper is a bit lengthy. Consider how the main discussion could be made more concise.

Actions taken : We have revised the introduction section . We have rationalized the arguments, made it concise and kept only relevant literature. Please see page 2-3 in the revised version 

 Comment 2- The conclusions sections appear a bit abrupt. Consider how it could be deepened and made more reflective. Especially the paragraph on the study's contributions is very short.

Action taken: As suggested conclusion section is further strengthen, improved and reflective.  You could see the changes incorporated in the red color write up on page 12-13.

Comment 3: I was missing a clear theoretical definition of the concept "low-tech (LT) and low-to-medium tech (LT/LMT)" already in the introduction section.

Action taken: As suggested we have clearly explain the concept of  LT/LMT in the introduction section page  2.

 

Thank you once again 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper “The forgotten Sector: An Integrative Framework for Future Research on Low- and Medium – Technology Innovation” shed light on innovation in low-tech and low-medium tech sectors and proposes an integrative framework built on a critically review. The topic addressed is interesting and on-time. The introduction provides an exhaustive introduction to the topic and the aims are well defined. The methodology section shows some weaknesses: authors do not provide any details about the number of papers analyzed and do not explain how emergent themes were searched and selected. Further, it is not clear if the proposed framework emerges from the literature, or it is still part of the methodology. The absence of a section clearly identified as “result” further complicates the readability. Perhaps, part of the text now included in the section 4.Discussion could be moved to a “Results” section. References should be adapted to the Sustainability standard

Author Response

We all are thankful for your time and giving relevant and useful suggestions on our manuscript. We strongly believe after incorporating comments, our papers has improved substantially and looks promising. 

We have incorporated proposed changes and improvements in the methodology. In this paper we have included 156 research papers. Information is included and highlighted on the page 4 in the red color text. In addition, regarding information regarding emergent themes has been explained on page 5 in track changes.  Our framework has been emerged from analysis of selected 156 papers. In addition we have made it more explicit and headings has been revised and presented in a clear way. Pleasse see page number 3, and 6 .

 

Thanks you once again

Reviewer 3 Report

Although the article is interesting and contains the most essential elements expected from this type of publication - it needs refinement. I recommend for reconsideration and again encourage you to submit for publication. 

 

Author Response

We all are thankful for your time and giving relevant and useful suggestions on our manuscript. We strongly believe after incorporating comments, our papers has improved substantially and looks promising. 

Following your advise we have made improvements in the whole paper. Please see changes in tracks and red color text. 

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have made the requested changes and the quality of the paper has raised up significantly. The paper can be published in the present form

Reviewer 3 Report

-