A Panel Analysis on the Nexus between Financial Development, Oil Production, and Trade-Openness and Its Impact on Sustainable Economic Growth: Evidence from Selected Arab Economies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review report for the manuscript:

A panel analysis on the nexus between financial development, oil production, trade-openness on sustainable economic growth: Evidence from selected Arab economies

The contribution of the paper is only an empirical one and marginal. The study does not contain any theoretical or methodological contribution. Only well-known existing methods are used. In general, the paper is poorly written. For instance, the first sentence in the Abstract is unintelligible to a reader. There are a lot of editing typos in the whole manuscript.

Some additional major and minor comments:

·         The contribution of the paper is decidedly overestimated (lines 129-143 and lines 306-316).

·         Lines 117-128: the passage is poorly written and unclear. However, it is important since it presents the contribution of this study.

·         Lines 143-145: editing typos.

·         The sample period from 1994 to 2020 is not recent and therefore the empirical findings will be not interesting for potential readers.

·         The presentation of the results is not acceptable at this stage. The Authors present five tables at the beginning of Section 4, while they should present the results as follows: Table 2 and the discussion of the results. Next, Table 3 and the discussion, etc.

·         Section 5 (Conclusion and policy direction) should be improved. For instance, the passage in lines 554-561 includes unintelligible sentences.

·         The References section is poorly written since there are a lot of editing typos.

To sum up, I understand that this is a second version of the manuscript, but it still looks like a draft of the paper. The manuscript requires a lot of work to be ready for publication anywhere.  

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are a lot of editing typos within the whole manuscript.

Author Response

Response to reviewers

The authors are thankful to editor and anonymous referee for his/her constructive comments on the paper entitled  “Nexus between Financial Development and economic growth in Arab economies: A panel analysis” with Manuscript ID Ms. Ref. No.: sustainability-2946366  to improve the quality of our paper. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them as they have been constructively taken on board. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper in line with the referees’ observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process.

During the revision process some empirical explanations have been rectified in order to offer more interesting results for readers and audience of the journal. We have attempted to reply on a point-by-point basis to the queries and suggestions of the reviewers.

 

Editors comments

Many thanks to the kind managing editor and editorial office, all above concerns have been meticulous attended too

(I) Please check that all references are relevant to the contents of the

manuscript.

Response: Many thanks to the editor for the observation. All in text and bibiography matches and are necessary to the subject been refereed.

(II) Any revisions to the manuscript should be highlighted, such that any

changes can be easily reviewed by editors and reviewers.

Response: We have also highlighted all relevant improvement with yellow highlights in the revised version.

(III) Please provide a cover letter to explain, point by point, the details

of the revisions to the manuscript and your responses to the referees’

comments.

Response:  Many thanks dear respected managing editor. We appended a cover letter as directed by the managing editor on all changes both in main manuscript and a cover letter

(IV) If the reviewer(s) recommended references, please critically analyze

them to ensure that their inclusion would enhance your manuscript. If you

believe these references are unnecessary, you should not include them.

Response: Many thanks , we taken the counsel on board and incorporated only relevant references suggestion on board

(V) If you found it impossible to address certain comments in the review

reports, please include an explanation in your appeal.

Response: Many thanks. Many thanks for the notices, we appended rebuttal where necessary

(VI) The revised version will be sent to the editors and reviewers.

Response: we will definable do that, many thanks

We noticed that the reference citations are in Chicago format. Please

kindly note that all the references must be mentioned and cited in

numerical sequence in the main text. Please cite reference with

reference numbers, and place the numbers in square brackets [ ], for

example [1], [1–3] or [1,3].

Response : Many thanks dear managing editor, we have changed the intext references and bibliograph according to journal authors guide in numbering format

Many thanks

Reviewer 1

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review report for the manuscript:

A panel analysis on the nexus between financial development, oil production, trade-openness on sustainable economic growth: Evidence from selected Arab economies

The contribution of the paper is only an empirical one and marginal. The study does not contain any theoretical or methodological contribution. Only well-known existing methods are used. In general, the paper is poorly written. For instance, the first sentence in the Abstract is unintelligible to a reader. There are a lot of editing typos in the whole manuscript.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee, the revised manuscript has corrected all typo and grammatical issues by employing the services of an English native speaker to help aid free flow of the study. While for novelty, a more stylized and theoretical dimension has been incorporated to the revised version as suggested by the kind referee

Some additional major and minor comments:

• The contribution of the paper is decidedly overestimated (lines 129-143 and lines 306-316).

Response: Thanks for the comments. The contribution of the study is now improved based on comments

• Lines 117-128: the passage is poorly written and unclear. However, it is important since it presents the contribution of this study.

Response: Thanks for the comments this is now addressed in the study

• Lines 143-145: editing typos.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. The mentioned sentences have been reposition to suit the main focus and novelty of the study as outlined in the last paragraph of the study as suggested by the kind referee. Thanks this is now addressed

• The sample period from 1994 to 2020 is not recent and therefore the empirical findings will be not interesting for potential readers.

Response: Many thanks to the kind referee and we understand the concern about the sample period not being recent. However, our data availability was limited, particularly regarding the Financial Development Index and Gross Capital Formation. While we could access Financial Development Index data up to 2021 for all countries, Gross Capital Formation data for Kuwait was only available up to 2019. In order to have robust results, we generated the Gross capital formation for 2020 by taking the average of the series. As a result, the panel data for this study spans over the period 1994 to 2020.

 

• The presentation of the results is not acceptable at this stage. The Authors present five tables at the beginning of Section 4, while they should present the results as follows: Table 2 and the discussion of the results. Next, Table 3 and the discussion, etc.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. We deeply sorry for the mix up and poor presentation of the tables and discussion. We have updated the study accordingly as suggested by the kind referee with each table and accompanying discussion in a more detailed manner as presented in the revised version.

• Section 5 (Conclusion and policy direction) should be improved. For instance, the passage in lines 554-561 includes unintelligible sentences.
• The References section is poorly written since there are a lot of editing typos.

To sum up, I understand that this is a second version of the manuscript, but it still looks like a draft of the paper. The manuscript requires a lot of work to be ready for publication anywhere.  

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. The above concerns have been amended accordingly. We improved the presentation of results and tabulation and added new Table 4 unit root test  results to highlights the variables order of integration which as previous omitted as well and the presentation of each tables and after discussion of results . while affect conclusion been corrected and improved in a more styled manner and more policy direction driven from the study results

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are a lot of editing typos within the whole manuscript.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee, the revised manuscript has corrected all typo and grammatical issues by employing the services of an English native speaker to help aid free flow of the study.We also explored the serves of professional editor as seen with certificate appended to the submission. While for novelty, a more stylized and theoretical dimension has been incorporated to the revised version as suggested by the kind referee

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors have discussed a panel analysis on the Nexus between Financial Development, oil production, and trade-openness on Sustainable Economic growth: Evidence from selected Arab economies. The present study seeks to explore the dynamic nexus between oil production and economic growth while accounting for key growth drivers like gross capital formulation accumulation, labor, trade openness and financial development for a balanced panel of selected Arab economies. Over all the problem is well written and the results included are correct. I strongly recommend it for publication in this journal. However, prior to that, an adequate response concerning the following suggestions is demanded;

1. Please include a guide to the paper at the end of the Introduction, explaining what each section in the paper does.

2.  Include the demonstration of Eqs. 1 and 2.

3. Discuss the influences of chaos with the present study and describe the correlation analysis with https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.11257

4.  Demonstrate Fig. 1 and Table 2 in detail.

5.  Future works with applicability should be included at the end.

  

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Can be improve

Author Response

Response to reviewers

The authors are thankful to editor and anonymous referee for his/her constructive comments on the paper entitled  “Nexus between Financial Development and economic growth in Arab economies: A panel analysis” with Manuscript ID Ms. Ref. No.: sustainability-2946366  to improve the quality of our paper. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them as they have been constructively taken on board. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper in line with the referees’ observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process.

During the revision process some empirical explanations have been rectified in order to offer more interesting results for readers and audience of the journal. We have attempted to reply on a point-by-point basis to the queries and suggestions of the reviewers.

 

Editors comments

Many thanks to the kind managing editor and editorial office, all above concerns have been meticulous attended too

(I) Please check that all references are relevant to the contents of the

manuscript.

Response: Many thanks to the editor for the observation. All in text and bibiography matches and are necessary to the subject been refereed.

(II) Any revisions to the manuscript should be highlighted, such that any

changes can be easily reviewed by editors and reviewers.

Response: We have also highlighted all relevant improvement with yellow highlights in the revised version.

(III) Please provide a cover letter to explain, point by point, the details

of the revisions to the manuscript and your responses to the referees’

comments.

Response:  Many thanks dear respected managing editor. We appended a cover letter as directed by the managing editor on all changes both in main manuscript and a cover letter

(IV) If the reviewer(s) recommended references, please critically analyze

them to ensure that their inclusion would enhance your manuscript. If you

believe these references are unnecessary, you should not include them.

Response: Many thanks , we taken the counsel on board and incorporated only relevant references suggestion on board

(V) If you found it impossible to address certain comments in the review

reports, please include an explanation in your appeal.

Response: Many thanks. Many thanks for the notices, we appended rebuttal where necessary

(VI) The revised version will be sent to the editors and reviewers.

Response: we will definable do that, many thanks

We noticed that the reference citations are in Chicago format. Please

kindly note that all the references must be mentioned and cited in

numerical sequence in the main text. Please cite reference with

reference numbers, and place the numbers in square brackets [ ], for

example [1], [1–3] or [1,3].

Response : Many thanks dear managing editor, we have changed the intext references and bibliograph according to journal authors guide in numbering format

Many thanks

Reviewer 2

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Authors have discussed a panel analysis on the Nexus between Financial Development, oil production, and trade-openness on Sustainable Economic growth: Evidence from selected Arab economies. The present study seeks to explore the dynamic nexus between oil production and economic growth while accounting for key growth drivers like gross capital formulation accumulation, labor, trade openness and financial development for a balanced panel of selected Arab economies. Over all the problem is well written and the results included are correct. I strongly recommend it for publication in this journal. However, prior to that, an adequate response concerning the following suggestions is demanded;

1. Please include a guide to the paper at the end of the Introduction, explaining what each section in the paper does.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. A sentence on the next step and guidance been added to the study as suggested by the kind referee on the last paragraph of the introduction."The remainder of this study is  organized as follows: The other four sections are:  Section 2 outlines both theoretical foundation and empirical literature while section 3 presents  data and methodology. Section 4 renders the  results, discussion, and while section 5 provides the conclusion and policy suggestions”

2. Include the demonstration of Eqs. 1 and 2.

Response: Many thanks, we have explained the equations 1 and 2 in the revised version of the manuscript.

 Discuss the influences of chaos with the present study and describe the correlation analysis with https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2022.11257

Response: we have incorporated the chances as suggested by the kind referee in the discussion section with the aid of the suggested article

4. Demonstrate Fig. 1 and Table 2 in detail.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. All Table and figures been explain in details as suggested by the kind referee

5. Future works with applicability should be included at the end.

  Response: Applicability and suggestion for policy makes and stakeholders been added as suggested by the kind referee in the conclusion section. The applicability of the study lies on the results driven policy direction on the validation of the Solow and classical growth model preposition

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Can be improve

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee, the revised manuscript has corrected all typo and grammatical issues by employing the services of an English native speaker to help aid free flow of the study. We also explored the serves of professional editor as seen with certificate appended to the submission. While for novelty, a more stylized and theoretical dimension has been incorporated to the revised version as suggested by the kind referee

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article concerns important problems in assessing the connections between financial development, oil production, openness to trade, and sustainable economic growth of selected Arab economies. The topics presented are very important and up-to-date in the changing economic environment.

The presented research evaluated the dynamic nexus between oil production and economic growth while accounting for key growth drivers like gross capital formulation accumulation, labor, trade openness, and financial development for a balanced panel of selected Arab economies.

This goal was achieved. Using the second-generation panel econometric approach, the authors verified the research hypothesis. The research methods used in the study are correct. Using the presented econometric techniques significantly enriches the substantive values ​​of the analyzed content. The authors correctly discussed the obtained research results and, in the summary, outlined recommendations for further areas of research.

The layout of the article complies with editorial requirements, there are no serious comments in terms of editorial assessment, and the literature review is up to date. Please consider language correction and minor punctuation errors.

The article contains numerous corrections (text in red and yellow), meaning the authors probably referred to other reviews. This also applies to the title of the article. The authors made the recommended changes out of concern for the quality of the study.

For the best possible reception of the study by readers, please consider the justification of the research period in the research part. Figure 1 presents data for 2010-2020, and further in the study, point 3.1. Data and Model Specification – The authors indicate that they used the research period from 1994-2020. Should it be justified, why the research ends in 2020? Alternatively, try to update them, considering that it is 2024.

Additionally, in the summary, please indicate what the research gap was and whether it was possible to fill it by conducting a panel analysis using complex econometric techniques.

Author Response

Response to reviewers

The authors are thankful to editor and anonymous referee for his/her constructive comments on the paper entitled  “Nexus between Financial Development and economic growth in Arab economies: A panel analysis” with Manuscript ID Ms. Ref. No.: sustainability-2946366  to improve the quality of our paper. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them as they have been constructively taken on board. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper in line with the referees’ observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process.

During the revision process some empirical explanations have been rectified in order to offer more interesting results for readers and audience of the journal. We have attempted to reply on a point-by-point basis to the queries and suggestions of the reviewers.

 

Editors comments

Many thanks to the kind managing editor and editorial office, all above concerns have been meticulous attended too

(I) Please check that all references are relevant to the contents of the

manuscript.

Response: Many thanks to the editor for the observation. All in text and bibiography matches and are necessary to the subject been refereed.

(II) Any revisions to the manuscript should be highlighted, such that any

changes can be easily reviewed by editors and reviewers.

Response: We have also highlighted all relevant improvement with yellow highlights in the revised version.

(III) Please provide a cover letter to explain, point by point, the details

of the revisions to the manuscript and your responses to the referees’

comments.

Response:  Many thanks dear respected managing editor. We appended a cover letter as directed by the managing editor on all changes both in main manuscript and a cover letter

(IV) If the reviewer(s) recommended references, please critically analyze

them to ensure that their inclusion would enhance your manuscript. If you

believe these references are unnecessary, you should not include them.

Response: Many thanks , we taken the counsel on board and incorporated only relevant references suggestion on board

(V) If you found it impossible to address certain comments in the review

reports, please include an explanation in your appeal.

Response: Many thanks. Many thanks for the notices, we appended rebuttal where necessary

(VI) The revised version will be sent to the editors and reviewers.

Response: we will definable do that, many thanks

We noticed that the reference citations are in Chicago format. Please

kindly note that all the references must be mentioned and cited in

numerical sequence in the main text. Please cite reference with

reference numbers, and place the numbers in square brackets [ ], for

example [1], [1–3] or [1,3].

Response : Many thanks dear managing editor, we have changed the intext references and bibliograph according to journal authors guide in numbering format

Many thanks

 

Reviewer 3

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article concerns important problems in assessing the connections between financial development, oil production, openness to trade, and sustainable economic growth of selected Arab economies. The topics presented are very important and up-to-date in the changing economic environment.

The presented research evaluated the dynamic nexus between oil production and economic growth while accounting for key growth drivers like gross capital formulation accumulation, labor, trade openness, and financial development for a balanced panel of selected Arab economies.

This goal was achieved. Using the second-generation panel econometric approach, the authors verified the research hypothesis. The research methods used in the study are correct. Using the presented econometric techniques significantly enriches the substantive values ​​of the analyzed content. The authors correctly discussed the obtained research results and, in the summary, outlined recommendations for further areas of research.

The layout of the article complies with editorial requirements, there are no serious comments in terms of editorial assessment, and the literature review is up to date. Please consider language correction and minor punctuation errors.

The article contains numerous corrections (text in red and yellow), meaning the authors probably referred to other reviews. This also applies to the title of the article. The authors made the recommended changes out of concern for the quality of the study.

For the best possible reception of the study by readers, please consider the justification of the research period in the research part. Figure 1 presents data for 2010-2020, and further in the study, point 3.1. Data and Model Specification – The authors indicate that they used the research period from 1994-2020. Should it be justified, why the research ends in 2020? Alternatively, try to update them, considering that it is 2024.

Response: Many thanks to the kind referee and we understand the concern about the sample period not being recent. The yellow highlights were from previous rounds of revisions as questions and concerns raised by previous round of review in the editorial process. On the current concerns on our study data . However, our data availability was limited, particularly regarding the Financial Development Index and Gross Capital Formation. While we could access Financial Development Index data up to 2021 for all countries, Gross Capital Formation data for Kuwait was only available up to 2019. In order to have robust results, we generated the Gross capital formation for 2020 by taking the average of the series. As a result, the panel data for this study spans over the period 1994 to 2020.Figure 1 shows only oil production which is available for all the selected countries. However, we have to restricted our data period based the data availability for all other variables.

Additionally, in the summary, please indicate what the research gap was and whether it was possible to fill it by conducting a panel analysis using complex econometric techniques.

Response: Many thanks to the kind anonymous referee. The revised version has carefully outlined the advances of the use of second generational model in the updated file as the method presents more robust and reliable estimates for onward policy formation for the investigated countries ( Please see section 3 for more details)

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper has been improved.