How Does Public Opinion Influence Production Safety within Small and Medium Enterprises in the Sustainability Context?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper has an interesting topic , but you should consider some suggestions in order to improve the paper:

-Introduction section: you explained the purpose of this paper, but you should  point it out somewhere in Introduction in a simple way, such as: "The purpose of this paper is..." or "The main objective/goal of this paper is...". Moreover, you should shortly explain the structure of this paper.

Why did you write the last part of Introduction like the conclusion? I am talking about the part of the Introduction section which begins with" The main contributions include:......."

- Conclusion section: As every paper has some limitations and suggestions for further research, I suggest to point that out because it could help others who would like to investigate this topic in the context of their markets.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents a qualitative analysis of the role of public perceptions on the safety performance of SMEs. Interviews and documentation analysis are reviewed to give a theoretical model of the role of public perception on safety performance in SMEs. Overall, the paper is well written, with a clear presentation of the methodology and results. The topic is important, and there is clear research gap. Contributions of the paper are both theoretical and practical. Overall, the paper is very good and I have only a few comments. 

1) While the focus of the paper is public perceptions, I was surprised earlier in the introduction and background that there was no discussion of the role of the supply chain. SMEs are often supplying to larger companies, and several researchers have found that the role of the larger customers will influence safety performance in SMEs. (eg Winkler, C., & Irwin, J. N. (2003). Contractorisation: aspects of health and safety in the supply chain.) Could the authors comment on this in the paper?

2) 2nd last para of the introduction is not very clear to me. Please rephrase.

3) The paper talks at a number of points about 'game' relationships - could the authors expand and clarify what they mean?

4) Please reference the "theory saturation principle"

5) What ethical and consent processes were followed? How were these communicated to participants?

6) The description of the analysis methodology section is thorough - but quite long. If space needed to be saved, it could be here.

7) The links between the theoretical model diagram / concepts and the descriptions in the text are not always clear - could the authors use something like italics to highlight concept names or subsections in the text to make it easier to cross reference with the model?

8) There is no limitations section in the paper.

9) What is the relevance of the Chinese context? The paper is good so are the results relevant to other countries, or is there anything which is only relevant to China? 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf