Coupling Coordination Analysis of County Tourism Development and Multidimensional Poverty Based on Nighttime Light Data

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

I enjoyed reading your research that explored the relationship between tourism development and poverty alleviation from the perspective of multidimensional poverty.

1. The introduction is well structured, it specify the relevance of the problem to be researched, the current state of research, and the research objectives. Given the complex interactions between tourism and poverty reduction, the coupling coordination degree (CCD) model has been proposed to explore the relationship between the two. This model can reflect the level of coordination between tourism development and multidimensional poverty and contribute to the equilibrium of poverty reduction in tourism.

3. Materials and methods

In my opinion, this section is very well presented. However, there is a discrepancy between the relative error (RE) symbolization used in the text (line 257) and the one used for formula (4).

4. Results

The research results are transparent and the method of presenting the results is adequate. The figures and tables created are very suggestive and clearly reflect the results obtained.

4. Discussion

The discussion of the research results and the adopted assumptions is accurate, deepened and complements the research results.

There was also information on who the research results are addressed, for whom they may be useful and to what extent.

The list of references contains 56 references, including a large collection of current publications.

I congratulate the authors and I wish much success in their further scientific work!

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments, please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Interesting research, some adjustments must be made although:

-        For the abstract part you must reduce a little bit. In this curent format ist oo long, it has 679 words...(the abstract must have around 250-300 words)

-        You must follow the structure of the journal, introduction, literature review, research results, discussion and conclusion. The points 2-3 you could put them toghether under the title of Research Methodology.

-        For the reference part you must improve it!!!!

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments, Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is necessary to summarize the abstract and highlight only the key results and conclusions of the paper, not recounting all the results in detail.

The introductory part of the paper is written in such a way that it includes all the necessary information to introduce the reader to the topic of the work and to explain the issues and objectives of the paper

It is only necessary to pay attention to the alleged references, for example: with claims such as: "Past practical experience had shown that poverty reduction through tourism had has significant potential value in consolidating the gains from poverty eradication and curbing the return to poverty." (line 44) Or "The Chinese government has identified 160 key assistance counties for rural revitalization to improve the overall development level of poverty-stricken areas" (line 18) it is necessary to indicate the source of the data.

Check the entire introduction for references.

Although there is no separate literature review chapter in the paper, it is necessary to add this together with the title "introduction". Likewise, it is necessary to strengthen the review of the literature with recent references and researches done on that and similar topics relevant to the paper.

The Study Area and Data chapter is explained in detail and comprehensibly.

The methodology is explained in a very detailed and professional manner, so that it is possible to repeat the search and check the credibility of the results at any time.

The results are presented also clearly, with the display of numerous graphic explanations that significantly contribute to the clarity of the results.

Avoid writing style "In our study (line 529)", which is not academic. Instead, state "in this research" and the like. Pay attention throughout the text.

Subheading 5.3 Limitations and Future Research Directions should be within the conclusion heading

In conclusion, it is necessary to add only more practical implications of the paper.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments, Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 

Thank you for the opportunity to review this intriguing manuscript. 

The paper presented deals with an exciting and vital topic. It needs to be treated as a critical voice in the discussion, the proposed theoretical approach is precious to the raised issue.

The research methodology and application of appropriate statistical techniques are all adequate for the analysis.  The visual figures are useful and clearly labelled.

The literature review is quite correct and comprehensive.

Overall the presentation is reasonably good, but it might still require some work.

- There is no information about the paper's aim/aims (both in the Abstract section and in all manuscript). However, in a research paper, the manuscript's purpose should be more precisely indicated.

 

- I lacked a real discussion section. The Discussion section should reveal a literature review of studies published or accessed elsewhere. It is worth referring to the international context more extensively. Please, compare your research with similar research so you can draw an adequate conclusion. It is crucial to raise the scientific level of the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments, Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

You did improve your article, but stil remains two aspecte:

-regarding the reference part, you did not improve it...in the old version of the manuscript you have 56 sources, now you have 52....you must add references not remove them!!!

-you dont have a literature review part. This topic was not researched by anyone?!!

 

Kind regards

Author Response

Thank you again for your valuable comments, please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf