Spatial Regulation Instruments of Work at Home: The Case of Slovenia as a Post-Transition Country
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper aims at studying the regulatory framework of work at home, its actual spatial and program footprint, and its relation with building typologies and morphologies. The paper provides interesting findings of the allocation preferences of businesses in Slovenia, the role of building size and typology, and the failure of planning business zones to attract businesses compared to residential areas.
In general, the main issues of paper have to do with:
- the text flow, several restructures are needed in order to provide the reader a clear and comprehensive sequence of information,
- the weak and unclear research on the institutional framework, which in the end is less important because is not the main focus of the paper,
- the proposals session is disturbing and unjustified, and again of less importance.
The introduction could incorporate more information from other parts of the paper in order to be more concrete and support the comprehensive reading of the text.
The problem is clearly defined. Methods and Data session although extended it is somehow confusing about the tools and the processes of the research. For example, how did the authors identify five (5) different types of morphological units? It clear which is the spatial act responsible for each type but how urban design and location in space are defined? There is some clarification in lines 279-284 but the sequence of information provided does not support a comprehensive reading.
Paragraph 3.1, does not provide clearly its major findings, a sum-up paragraph at the end might be useful. Also, within the text, the institutional framework, needs to be more accurate in its findings. For example, how is the “modest or indirect impact” of the commercial law defined? Where does the vocational educational system fit in Figure 2 structure? The overall flow of paragraph 3.1 needs restructuring and clarifications. A matrix or a list of the legal documents and regulations examined needs to be available at the beginning of the chapter in order for the reader to follow the text. I would alternatively advise examining to remove 3.1. from the research and add a shorter version as an informative paragraph in the introduction.
Paragraph 3.2 is sufficiently presented. Data and results are informative, visually supported, and adequate. It is although needed to clarify the cases of residential buildings completely inhabited by businesses, and if and how this is measured or taken in mind. Can we count these cases, if they exist, as work at home?
Chapter 4 includes a big part of the text, up to line 640 that could be part of the theoretical framework and mentioned at the beginning of the paper. Normally proposals come after the discussion and conclusion session since they are based on the summary of findings. As they are developed at this point they look undocumented. I would advise moving this paragraph and adding it as a shorter text in the conclusions.
I cannot understand in the end what is the authors’ view on the significance of promoting or facilitating work at home. Is it something desirable or not? Since the system is “tolerant” it means that it supports work at home, so why do we need more regulation? To improve working and residential environments or to fill underused business zones? Maybe the problem is about what else we can do with the business zones and why they are not attractive anymore.
Finally, I would suggest examining the suitability of the word “tolerant”, if it is not an established term within other papers on Slovenian planning I would suggest replacing it with "loose" or "flexible"
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for comments and suggestions. Here are our replayes, attached you can find the completed manuscript with corrections from all three reviewers.
Reviewer #1: Comments
|
|
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions |
Author’s corrections |
|
1. |
For example, how did the authors identify five (5) different types of morphological units (Ln 249)? It clear which is the spatial act responsible for each type but how urban design and location in space are defined? There is some clarification in lines 279-284 but the sequence of information provided does not support a comprehensive reading. |
Morphological units are defined at the level of the spatial plan. They are spatially contiguous areas with a predominantly uniform urban structure, zoning and building typology. From the perspective of spatial planning, they are subject to the provisions of a single implementing act. At the plan level, there are different units. Eligible types have been defined based on the following criteria: location in space (rural, suburban, urban) and urban structure (single dwellings, multi-family). Other criteria are listed in Table 1. |
|
2. |
Paragraph 3.1, does not provide clearly its major findings, a sum-up paragraph at the end might be useful. Also, within the text, the institutional framework, needs to be more accurate in its findings. For example, how is the “modest or indirect impact” of the commercial law defined? Where does the vocational educational system fit in Figure 2 structure? The overall flow of paragraph 3.1 needs restructuring and clarifications. A matrix or a list of the legal documents and regulations examined needs to be available at the beginning of the chapter in order for the reader to follow the text. I would alternatively advise examining to remove 3.1. from the research and add a shorter version as an informative paragraph in the introduction. |
Chapter 3.1 has been substantially changed in accordance with the comments, so the corrections are not listed line by line. All changes are entered with a track - changes, so that traceability is ensured. |
|
3. |
Paragraph 3.2 is sufficiently presented. Data and results are informative, visually supported, and adequate. It is although needed to clarify the cases of residential buildings completely inhabited by businesses, and if and how this is measured or taken in mind. Can we count these cases, if they exist, as work at home? |
Considering the methodological explanations in chapter 2, it can be argued that it is work at home (since these are the locations/addresses where the business entitites are registered) and not home from work. However, the situation can also be explained by past practice (and flexible legislation) in the field of spatial planning. |
|
4. |
Chapter 4 includes a big part of the text, up to line 640 that could be part of the theoretical framework and mentioned at the beginning of the paper. Normally proposals come after the discussion and conclusion session since they are based on the summary of findings. As they are developed at this point they look undocumented. I would advise moving this paragraph and adding it as a shorter text in the conclusions. |
We have noted the comment and moved the text to the Introduction as a new subsection 1.2. The following subheading has been renumbered accordingly (Ln 144-172) |
|
5. |
I cannot understand in the end what is the authors’ view on the significance of promoting or facilitating work at home. Is it something desirable or not? Since the system is “tolerant” it means that it supports work at home, so why do we need more regulation? To improve working and residential environments or to fill underused business zones? Maybe the problem is about what else we can do with the business zones and why they are not attractive anymore. |
We further argued our view on work at home. Ln 877-884:
Based on all the above, the authors argue that work at home is certainly a positive spatial phenomenon, but only to the extent that its negative effects do not significantly worsen living conditions. In this sense, we argue for more effective regulation of work at home. Economic zones as a spatial alternative have clearly not had their full effect. Despite their abundance, spatial distribution and market (real estate) promotion, work at home remains a traditional spatial practice. In this context, economic zones are merely a parallel development capacity that has yet to compete with some of the benefits of work at home. |
|
6. |
Finally, I would suggest examining the suitability of the word “tolerant”, if it is not an established term within other papers on Slovenian planning I would suggest replacing it with "loose" or "flexible" |
We replaced the word tolerant with term flexible, where it made sense. |
|
7. |
Detailed reviewer comments in the attached pdf document:
Ln 125 -127
Ln 143-144: This context is not very clear. It needs more words to be understandable from a third party. Could you provide some average sizes and informative statical data?
Ln 148: What does this mean? and how is it documented?
Ln 160: What are its main elements? Do you describe them in an other point?
Ln 221: syntaxs?
Ln 230: we need a matrix or a diagram with steps and phases in order to summarize.
Ln 236: work at home in a non residential building? does it make sense?
Ln 249: how?
Ln 253: What is location in space? Can you explain?
Table 1: - Period of the spatial plan adaptation: Is it clearly linked to the building construction period?
- what do you mean high tolerances? is there a maximum size set? how sizing is regulated?
Ln 327: Is it a verification of the legality a permitting process or is it something done after or during work at home?
Ln 379: Yes, but how can you be sure that the business is hosted in the same building with residences?
Ln 406: Is this previously mentioned? Where does it fit.
Ln 413: where is this recorded?
Ln 439: Do they operate in residential buildings along with residential uses in the same building, or a residential building has completely transformed into a business building.
Line 533: what are the units? square meters?
Ln 707: terminology, check
Ln 720: How the system's complexity is documented in the results paragraph?
Ln 759: Better not to mention it in the conclusions since you have focused only on the first.
|
For better understanding, we have deleted part of the sentence. (Ln 130) We have not quoted specific statistics in this section, as we refer to other authors who have made similar conclusion. Administrative tolerance refers to the description of work at home in section 1.1. We have deleted the word administrative so as not to mislead the reader into thinking that it is about something else. (Ln 181) The explanations of work from home and work at home are given at the beginning of the second paragraph of the introduction. (Ln 39-42) Paraphrased (Ln 276) We consider that the methodological approach is described in a logical sequence, which is then followed by the results in Chapter 3, so no further diagram is necessary. The research is divided into four phases and the steps within each phase are explained in more detail. To make it easier to read, we specially marked (in bold) the indication of each Phase in the text. (Ln 264, 280, 290, 344) According to Slovenian spatial planning legislation, it is possible for non-residential buildings to be located in residential areas as well, so the analysis made sense in this regard. This was the only way to determine the extent ofwork at home in individual morfological units, since work at home is not possible in non-residential buildings. The answer is given under the first question of reviewer. It is about the location of each morphological unit in space as described in Table 1: whether it is in urban, suburban or rural settlements.
- The explanation of the period can be found below the table. It is more important to connect these periods with the introductory chapter. - In this period, urban planning conditions were often not given in an exact way and was characterized by the introduction of very flexible project conditions. We changed the term high tolerance into flexible.
It is about verifying the legality of buildings and facilities.
The relevant information is added. Ln 460: We have found that this data can be linked to real estate data as well as demographic data via the location where the company is based or has its business unit.
It refers to the review of the legislation of the competent institutions (Figure 2, Table 2). We have changed the wording in the sentence to make it clearer what it refers to. Ln 489: During the analysis of sectoral competent institutions regulations,…
Work at home was recorded through a spatial analysis.
The explanation is added. Ln 527: By analyzing activities of business entities in individual types of buildings, we found that 64.66% of them operate in residential buildings along with residential uses in the same buildings and…
Yes, we add to the figure description. Ln 627.
The correction of sentence is made. Ln 804: However, it is still evident that the situation regarding the regulation of work at home is still largely a consequence of the extensive spatial urbanization from the seventies and eighties of the last century.
Half of the sentence has been deleted. Ln 818
However, as it is mentioned in the introduction, we have only put it in brackets. Ln 859. |
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Following major changes in work practice this paper offers insight into the much longer term and underlying trend of home based businesses. Your work on collating multiple databases, and evaluating type of work based at home has been interesting to read. However, I feel that you need to consider more fully the positive impacts that home-based businesses have on both social and environmental issues. There may even be a place for recent planning discussions on ‘15 minute cities/20 minute neighbourhoods’? Currently your discussion appears to focus mainly on negative impacts, although you do allude to opportunities in your conclusion.
Specific text based notes:
Ln 39-42. These descriptions are key in establishing the importance of the research. I feel that you need to be clearer about why it is important to differentiate. Post pandemic it is highly likely that working from home (ie not your own business) will become much more normal in certain sectors – such as digital, financial, admin - perhaps being as much as 2-3 days per week at home, or even more. This then creates a much greater cross over into the work at home – especially in the Tertiary and Quaternary sectors. Do they also then require appropriate spatial working conditions – and what does that mean? Introducing this briefly at this point in your narrative will then help link it to your review in section 1.2.
Ln 141 – grammar – In the current period of facing the epidemic
Ln 148-152 – need to indicate both negative and positive research findings (155-158) – the way you have presented feels disjointed or contradictory, rather than a presentation of fact.
Ln 156 – grammar – where an individuals
Ln 171- 172 – Would it be worth expanding on this sentence – feels very general – positive and negative environmental, social and economic impacts.?
Ln 177-179 – sentence ending 'generate conflicts.' – reference
Ln 197-198 – please clarify allows business entities to register an activity at one address – why is that a deficiency?
Ln 202-208 – this section feels weak – can you reference previous work – substantiate these comments
Ln 215-217 – not clear what this means – can you make it easier for the reader to understand
Ln 249 – the first step – is this related to Third Phase? I found this section a little confusing to follow. I wonder if subheadings by Phase may make it clearer?
Ln 257 – Type D characteristics – what are ‘planned supply chain activities in neighbourhoods’?
Ln 269 - minor point but suggest use cap T for Type as it is a descriptor
Ln 271 - grammar – 'was in the inaccessible data'
Ln 271- 272- not sure what you mean by this point
Ln 311-312 – please could you check meaning of ‘form of performance’ - not clear what you are indicating
Ln 342-344 – sentence does not make sense
Ln 426 – is this a sub heading? – if so number as such. Do same with other sub heads in this section. It is confusing to read otherwise.
Ln 434-436 – if you feel that the number of employees is important should you be comparing this with those ‘employed’ working from home?
Ln 436 – I don’t believe you have described zoned land use category previously. Are these set/standard categories used by ? or have you created them from the data analysis. What are special areas?
Ln 448-450 – this last comment seems odd – not quite sure what you mean – could you clarify
Ln 451 – a sub heading or unfinished sentence?
Ln 467-470 – I am unclear as to how you have eliminated inaccuracies by illustrating these two examples?
Ln 484 – In earlier sections you have been clearly focused on residential and non residential building use as your main descriptors – in Fig 5 you start to describe them as buildings with business entities and buildings – is there a reason for not keeping to the same approach?
Ln 494 – you use the term 'synthetic results' but it is not clear what this means
Ln 506-518 – This paragraph does not provide any evidence from the literature or the research to support these statements – this may be more appropriate in the discussion?
Ln 521-522 – you state multi-apartment buildings have businesses on the ground floor – your research does not appear to have looked at this directly – does this need a reference?
Ln 539-537 – sentence structure could be improved
Ln 537 – sentence starting ‘Of course’ – do you have evidence or reference for this statement
Ln 594-595 – why are multi-apartment buildings the most flexible?
Page 19 discussion – as noted in the opening comments there are a number of positive aspects of working from home – such as less commuting traffic, potential development of local economy allowing local active travel, improved worklife balance.
Ln 682 – need for architects to allow for more flexible home space – repurposing rather than new building.
Ln 694 – this does not appear to be a bullet point?
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for comments and suggestions. Here are our replayes, attached you can find the completed manuscript with corrections from all three reviewers.
Reviewer #2: Comments
|
|
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions |
Author’s corrections |
|
1. |
Following major changes in work practice this paper offers insight into the much longer term and underlying trend of home based businesses. Your work on collating multiple databases, and evaluating type of work based at home has been interesting to read. However, I feel that you need to consider more fully the positive impacts that home-based businesses have on both social and environmental issues.
There may even be a place for recent planning discussions on ‘15 minute cities/20 minute neighbourhoods’? Currently your discussion appears to focus mainly on negative impacts, although you do allude to opportunities in your conclusion. |
We provide the following explanation for this comment: Yes, the article outlines the current situation in the area of spatial distribution and management of work at home. As you can see from the content, this explicit research was not designed to examine the positive and negative effects. In this sense, we only cite some important influences and refer to other authors. However, at your suggestion, we have also slightly expanded the list of positive impacts (see below). Recent planning discussions about "15-minute cities/20-minute neighbourhoods" are very interesting and relevant, but in our opinion would shift the focus of the article. |
|
2. |
Ln 39-42. These descriptions are key in establishing the importance of the research. I feel that you need to be clearer about why it is important to differentiate. Post pandemic it is highly likely that working from home (ie not your own business) will become much more normal in certain sectors – such as digital, financial, admin - perhaps being as much as 2-3 days per week at home, or even more. This then creates a much greater cross over into the work at home – especially in the Tertiary and Quaternary sectors. Do they also then require appropriate spatial working conditions – and what does that mean? Introducing this briefly at this point in your narrative will then help link it to your review in section 1.2. |
We added the following diction at the end of this paragraph (Ln 55-59): It is very likely that after the epidemic, work from home in particular will increase. This will present a clear challenge for adapting individual homes and entire neighborhoods. Each workplace (including computer working) has its own needs. This will probably require a thorough consideration of the new architectural concept of the living environment. |
|
3. |
Ln 141 – grammar – In the current period of facing the epidemic |
Paraphrased. Ln 174: While facing the epidemic… |
|
4. |
Ln 148-152 – need to indicate both negative and positive research findings (155-158) – the way you have presented feels disjointed or contradictory, rather than a presentation of fact. |
We added a sentence describing the positive effects (Ln 185-187): The main positive effects include high utilization of existing buildings and associated infrastructure, shorter labor migration and mobilization of neighborhood and family support. |
|
5. |
Ln 156 – grammar – where an individuals |
Ln 191:where individuals will perform their work… |
|
6. |
Ln 171- 172 – Would it be worth expanding on this sentence – feels very general – positive and negative environmental, social and economic impacts.?
|
We added some explanations (Ln 207-211):Its economic, social and environmental effects are both positive (utilization of residential buildings, individual scheduling of the work process and consequently greater efficiency, more contact with family members, lower environmental impact due to lower labor migration etc.)and negative (dispersal of workers, uncontrolled working conditions and effectiveness, social isolation of individuals, otherwise low but widespread and numerical impact on the environment etc.). |
|
|
Ln 177-179 – sentence ending 'generate conflicts.' – reference
|
We added two references dealing with these conflicts (Ln 218):At the same time, it is becoming increasingly clear that loose conditions in the organization of work in the living environment can also generate various conflicts [5, 38]. |
|
8. |
Ln 197-198 – please clarify allows business entities to register an activity at one address – why is that a deficiency?
|
A deficiency is what is explained below that in some cases there is no precise indication of the location where the company (business entity) is registered and where it actually operates (these cases are otherwise minor). The additional explanation is added (Ln 242 - 246):(e.g., possibility for business entities to report the activity at one address, but actually perform it at another). Public records do not contain this information, so the results of the analysis cannot fully reflect the actual situation. Similar case is the employee registration, as larger entities register all employees at one address, even though they actually work in various offices across the country [40]. |
|
9. |
Ln 202-208 – this section feels weak – can you reference previous work – substantiate these comments |
We dealt with the mentioned problems of available data in other related research. At the end of the paragraph we added the following statement (Ln 251-252): More about the characteristics of the data in the field of business entities is given in the 2020 study [40]. |
|
10. |
Ln 215-217 – not clear what this means – can you make it easier for the reader to understand |
We changed the existing diction. The new diction is (Ln 261-263):According to the research questions, the research was chronologically divided into four phases, where the second phase is partly related to previously conducted analyses [40]. |
|
11. |
Ln 249 – the first step – is this related to Third Phase? I found this section a little confusing to follow. I wonder if subheadings by Phase may make it clearer? |
Yes, it refers to the Third Phase. To make it easier to read, we specially marked (in bold) the indication of each Phase in the text. (Ln 264, 280, 290, 343) |
|
12. |
Ln 257 – Type D characteristics – what are ‘planned supply chain activities in neighbourhoods’? |
A better translation (Ln 303): - planned supply chain activities within neighborhoods- planned public services within neighborhoods |
|
13. |
Ln 269 - minor point but suggest use cap T for Type as it is a descriptor |
Correction is made where it is necessary. |
|
14. |
Ln 271 - grammar – 'was in the inaccessible data' |
Ln 316: The reason was the inaccessible data, so we… |
|
15. |
Ln 271- 272- not sure what you mean by this point
|
Explanation: due to the unavailability of relevant data, we reduced the number of analyzed cases from 80 to 74. |
|
16. |
Ln 311-312 – please could you check meaning of ‘form of performance’ - not clear what you are indicating |
(Ln 376-377): We found that work at home is never considered separately, as a special form of business performance of business entities, but is integrated into normative provisions as well as into databases on the performance of business entities in general. |
|
17. |
Ln 342-344 – sentence does not make sense |
The sentence has been deleted. |
|
18. |
Ln 426 – is this a sub heading? – if so number as such. Do same with other sub heads in this section. It is confusing to read otherwise. |
Yes, it is a subheading. To make it easier to read, we have additionally numbered all the subtitles in this chapter. |
|
19. |
Ln 434-436 – if you feel that the number of employees is important should you be comparing this with those ‘employed’ working from home? |
Additional explanation is added (Ln 521-522):Unfortunately, it is not possible to collect precise data on the number of those who work from home and are formally employed by these companies. In this sense, it is not possible to define the extent of temporary or even more permanent work from home. |
|
20. |
Ln 436 – I don’t believe you have described zoned land use category previously. Are these set/standard categories used by ? or have you created them from the data analysis. What are special areas? |
Yes, the standard categories of ladn use plans are used here. We add explanation in cmethodlogical chapter. Ln 281-282: ...in accordance with the spatial regulations for the preparation of land use… |
|
21. |
Ln 448-450 – this last comment seems odd – not quite sure what you mean – could you clarify |
The sentence is deleted. (Ln 537-539) |
|
22. |
Ln 451 – a sub heading or unfinished sentence?
|
Yes, it is a sub heading. To make it easier to read, we additionally numbered all the subtitles in this chapter. |
|
23. |
Ln 467-470 – I am unclear as to how you have eliminated inaccuracies by illustrating these two examples?
|
Translation misunderstanding. It was not a matter of eliminating inaccuracies, but to establish the presence of business entities in all selected cases. The correction is made(Ln 559):“In order to eliminate any inaccuracies make it clearer we chose two examples of…” |
|
24. |
Ln 484 – In earlier sections you have been clearly focused on residential and non residential building use as your main descriptors – in Fig 5 you start to describe them as buildings with business entities and buildings – is there a reason for not keeping to the same approach? |
All types of buildings in which businesses are registered (or not registered) are considered here, whether residential or non-residential. Ln 576:“Figure 5. The share of buildings (both types: residential and non residential) with business entities in the considered…” |
|
25. |
Ln 494 – you use the term 'synthetic results' but it is not clear what this means |
Translation misunderstanding. The correction is made (Ln 587) reads:“Synthetic results The results regarding the distribution by types of morphological units are more relevant for this article….” |
|
26. |
Ln 506-518 – This paragraph does not provide any evidence from the literature or the research to support these statements – this may be more appropriate in the discussion? |
Paragraph is moved to discussion. Ln 832-844. |
|
27. |
Ln 521-522 – you state multi-apartment buildings have businesses on the ground floor – your research does not appear to have looked at this directly – does this need a reference? |
Explanation: it is about the provisions of spatial planning acts for multi-apartment buildings. These in some cases stipulate the mandatory placement of business and service activities on the ground floor. We cannot refer to specific references, but to the cases analyzed, which also differ slightly from each other. |
|
28. |
Ln 539-547 – sentence structure could be improved |
Ln 632-636 |
|
29. |
Ln 537 – sentence starting ‘Of course’ – do you have evidence or reference for this statement |
Explanation: the point here is not to address any particular reference. The state merely points to general differences in the area where each case was analyzed, such as: relief features, population density, presence of a transport network, etc. We added this illustration to an existing sentence (Ln 631-632): “Of course, this is also due to the spatial conditions themselves (such as: relief features, population density, presence of a transport network, etc.)”. |
|
30. |
Ln 594-595 – why are multi-apartment buildings the most flexible? |
Explanation: it is stated that activities are those that are most flexible, not buildings. |
|
31. |
Ln 682 – need for architects to allow for more flexible home space – repurposing rather than new building. |
Added (Ln 782): • targeted planning of urban and architectural design of buildings for the needs of work at home (also guided and encouraged architects to plan appropriate flexible solutions). |
|
32. |
Ln 694 – this does not appear to be a bullet point? |
This part is moved at the end of the sentence in Ln 767. |
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This manuscript explores current normative provisions for the organization of work at home. The manuscript is well organized and supported by good displays (figures and tables). I have a few comments:
-Page 1: “This framework also includes work at home as a unique spatial phenomenon with many economic, social and environmental consequences.” Please list and discuss some of “many economic, social and environmental consequences”
-Page 5: “This is mainly due to obsolete data on the location of the business entity's registered office or its business unit and on the location where this business entity actually operates (e.g., rented business premises in a remote location that is not yet or not at all recorded in official records”. This is unclear. Please rephrase and add more details.
-Maps in Figures 3 and 4 lack details (scale, north arrow, etc).
-Page 16 “We then carried out an analysis in which we determined the relationship between spatial characteristics (location) and the sector of activities performed by business entities in each type of morphological units” what do you mean by “analysis”?
-English needs improvements.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for comments and suggestions. Here are our replayes, attached you can find the completed manuscript with corrections from all three reviewers.
Reviewer #3: Comments
|
|
Reviewer Comments and Suggestions |
Author’s corrections |
|
1. |
Page 1: “This framework also includes work at home as a unique spatial phenomenon with many economic, social and environmental consequences.” Please list and discuss some of “many economic, social and environmental consequences”. |
In the light of the comments of all three reviewers, a clarification has been added in Chapter 2.1. (Ln 207-211F): Its economic, social and environmental effects are both positive (utilization of residential buildings, individual scheduling of the work process and consequently greater efficiency, more contact with family members, lower environmental impact due to lower labor migration etc.) and negative (dispersal of workers, uncontrolled working conditions and effectiveness, social isolation of individuals, otherwise low but widespread and numerical impact on the environment etc.). |
|
2. |
Page 5: “This is mainly due to obsolete data on the location of the business entity's registered office or its business unit and on the location where this business entity actually operates (e.g., rented business premises in a remote location that is not yet or not at all recorded in official records”. This is unclear. Please rephrase and add more details. |
The more detailed explanation is added. Ln 242-246): (e.g., possibility for business entities to report the activity at one address, but actually perform it at another). Public records do not contain this information, so the results of the analysis cannot fully reflect the actual situation. Similar case is the employee registration, as larger entities register all employees at one address, even though they actually work in various offices across the country [40]. |
|
3. |
Maps in Figures 3 and 4 lack details (scale, north arrow, etc). |
The maps have been improved and replaced. |
|
4. |
Page 16 “We then carried out an analysis in which we determined the relationship between spatial characteristics (location) and the sector of activities performed by business entities in each type of morphological units” what do you mean by “analysis”? |
Paraphrased. Ln 661-664 |
|
5. |
English needs improvements. |
The language has been checked by a qualified English translator (proofreader). |
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Responding to the comments was fully adequate.
