Insight into the Multidimensional Poverty of the Mountainous Ethnic Minorities in Central Vietnam

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Sir,

Thank you for inviting me to review this paper. I think that this paper has a good quality, especially the method is acceptable, and the results can be shown the important contributions to the knowledge for a case in Vietnam.

However, I have some comments for this paper, I hope that all could enhance the quality of the paper.

1/ The paper should be clearly shown the novelty of the paper. Why this research is important?

2/ I think that the literature review is weak. It should be strongly enhanced. The previous studies refering to this paper are too old. I think that the industrial revolution and the pandemic have seriously changed the poverty and economic performance in recent years, but it lacks of the discussions.

3/ Methodology is far better than Methods.

4/ The quality of Figure is still ugly.

5/ The results are good. However, how to confirm the results are robust? Whether another scholar can re-study this topic in another area and will get a similar result?

Thank you

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The aim of the paper is " insight into the multidimensional poverty of the mountainous ethnic minorities in Central Vietnam ".

It should be realized that the Journal (as referred in Aims & Scope) does not accept case studies. Thus efforts should be made by the authors to make the findings relevant for an international audience (rather than for local policy makers). I believe this is possible focusing more strongly on the methodology used and the potential wider applicability of the Findings in the Discussion.

The manuscript holds potential to provide a contribution to the Journal, but still requires work, in particular on the structure, presentation and clarity of the results, and integration with scientific literature.

 In general, the manuscript could also benefit from proof-reading and improvement of grammar and language, but I have focused my comments on the scientific content.


The Abstract should follow the traditional format: description of problem and relevance, research aim, methods, key results, and implications for theory and practice.

Keywords should be optimized for database search purposes and should not repeat words already used in the article's title.

Introduction:
It seems that the majority of references used are old for poverty assessment.
You should describe some of the problems of poverty alleviation projects and I would suggest that the authors try to integrate some of the literature review on poverty alleviation theories and ethnic minorities in the Introduction. The current literature review can be used but try to focus on only a multifunctional poverty theories that are most prominent.

You should discuss some of the factors that have been found to positively or negatively affect poverty of ethnic minorities.

The Introduction should end with a statement of the research gap not purpose of the study.

Try to think about what the most relevant information about the case study is that the readers should now and what can add that benefit for the international readers

Materials and methods

Is this research exploratory or definitive?

Study area should bring to first subtitle of Methodology.

Some sentences has multiple errors and word flow and grammar are incorrect, please review.       Indexes?!!


Thanks for providing information on the sampling strategy but in quantitive phase number of population not specified

Two districts sampled is a very limited sample

There is still potential for sample / information bias and this should be acknowledged in the Discussion section.

Commune informant were asked about poverty solutions,  but probably in a more interview-friendly way (because they are probably not familiar with some of these concepts)? How was this done? Providing some example questions might be helpful or including the interview protocol as Appendix.
What has been your strategy about different scales of the indicators?

What has been your strategy about different weight of the indicators?

Findings:

You used a variable instead of poverty measurement index, variable is not valid in measuring poverty, but it should be converted into an index for Example: You should have used the employment rate (indicator) instead of the number of labor (people) and etc.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Row 37 – develop the introduction part

Row 74 – replace The purposes of this study were to: with: the main objectives of this study are...

Row 205 – replace Study site with study area. The study area is not a subchapter of the methodology, is a separate chapter (3. Study area).

In the chaper of study are is necessary to mentioned what is the number of population who live in the area, some characteristics of the demography  (structure by age groups, gender), if there are several  ethnic, minority  groups etc.

Row 225  - I suggest you to make a map with the study area, with the administrative units.

Row 237 – i understand thet the author validated 283 questionnaires, but it is not specified the population sample, which is the total number of the population in the area, what percentage of the total population are represented by those surveyed.

 

The methodology chapter must be restructured. It should include the methodology used, as well as the database used to determine poverty in the study area.

Part of the material used in the methodology can be reformulated and moved to the introduction chapter. So, first part, between rows 81-118, for exemple, in my opinion, can move to the introduction chapter.

Move the pharagraphe This study used an index developed based on the MPI by Alkire - Foster, MPI-VN and MPM-World Bank to establish a set of indicators to measure multidimensional poverty for the ethnic communities in mountainous areas. The index includes six main indicators: income, education, health care, housing, living conditions, and access to information. The income dimension will have only one indicator with a weight of 1/3, and the remaining five dimensions account for the rest weight of 2/3. Each dimension has two equally weighted indicators (1/15) (see Table 1) after the row  118.

It would be suggestive to make a scheme with the selected indicators, grouped in the three indexes and then in the final the multidimensional poverty index used (MPI-VN).

Subchaperts data collection and data analysis should be moved in front of the chapter Materials and Methods  (or methodology).

Fig. 2 is too large, and can be reduce in size.

I noticed that some bibliographic references are not cited in the text (ex: Nguyen)

Bibliographic references are not written in the same style.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Professor

 

I suggested that this page should be published

 

Thank you

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Thank you. Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: I suggested that this page should be published

Response 1: Thank you. We revised the manuscript and the proofreading was done. Please see the revised manuscript attached.

Reviewer 2 Report

Line 314 and 375: Indexes should be change to indices.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Thank you. Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: Line 314 and 375: Indexes should be change to indices.

Response 1: Thank you. We revised this point, please see rows 318 and 382 in the revised manuscript. The proofreading was also done. Please see the revised manuscript attached.

Reviewer 3 Report

the author respect the suggestions made

The order of the chapters could be restructured. After Intdroduction, the next chaperts can be: Study area, Methodology, Discussions, Results, and Conclusions.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Thank you. Our responses to your comments are as follows:

Point 1: 

The author respect the suggestions made

Response 1: Thank you.

Point 2: The order of the chapters could be restructured. After Intdroduction, the next chaperts can be: Study area, Methodology, Discussions, Results, and Conclusions.

Response 2: Thank you. We revised this point by restructuring it into seven sections: Introduction, Theoretical Background, Study Area, Methodology, Results, Discussions and Conclusions. Please see the changes in rows 121 and 241 of the revised manuscript. The proofreading was also done. Please see the revised manuscript attached.