Enhancing Women’s Entrepreneurship in Rural Ecuador: A Study Protocol Aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Sirs,

The study is interesting because it touches on issues that try to boost women's entrepreneurship, but the research gap that the paper deals with is not very prominent, and it is necessary to provide more references in this regard, to adequately justify the research. The research question is not well specified, that is why it is difficult to justify the research method. There is also no literature review of the most important concepts of the introduction. Likewise, no sample of participants is observed and the results are expected, but it seems that in reality they are not obtained, so it is not possible to obtain a quality discussion and to show the theoretical contributions of the paper. The changes required from the authors are very important and we hope we have been able to lead the way.

Best Regards

Author Response

One important point to mention: To address the reviewers' concern regarding the lack of empirical evidence, we have incorporated the results from a preliminary study conducted with 16 participants. This pre-pilot study provided valuable insights into the potential impact of our tailored business training program on rural women entrepreneurs in Ecuador. By presenting these initial findings, we aim to demonstrate the feasibility and relevance of our research, highlighting how the training interventions can positively influence agency, confidence, self-efficacy, and financial situation. The inclusion of these results strengthens the justification for our study protocol and underscores the practical significance and anticipated outcomes of the proposed full-scale study.

Comment:

The research gap that the paper deals with is not very prominent, and it is necessary to provide more references in this regard, to adequately justify the research.

Response:

Thank you very much for your comment. We have added a new paragraph in the introduction and an entire literature review section that also addresses this concern.

Comment:

The research question is not well specified, which makes it difficult to justify the research method.

Response:

We are grateful for your input. We have added the research question in the introduction section:  What is the impact of tailored business training on rural women entrepreneurs in Ecuador in terms of agency, confidence, self-efficacy, and financial situation?

Comment:

There is no literature review of the most important concepts of the introduction.

Response:

Thank you for your comment. In response, we have included a comprehensive literature review section that addresses this concern. Additionally, we have included a hypothesis and a preliminary study.

Comment:

No sample of participants is observed, and the results are expected, but it seems that in reality they are not obtained.

Response:

Your insights are greatly appreciated. We have conducted a preliminary study with 16 participants and added a new section presenting the results and discussions.

Comment:

It is not possible to obtain a quality discussion and to show the theoretical contributions of the paper.

Response:

Based on your feedback, the paper has undergone significant revisions. Despite the time constraints, we have completely reworked it, including the addition of a new literature review section. We also conducted a preliminary study with 16 participants, which, although not the main focus of this paper, provided valuable insights and helped refine our approach. Additionally, we introduced a new section detailing the results and discussions from this pre-pilot study. These changes have significantly enhanced the quality of the discussion and have more effectively highlighted the theoretical contributions of the paper.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for submitting the paper. Please consider the following comments and suggestions to improve the manuscript.

Abstract – OK but including some key findings would add more value to the paper.  Keywords: OK

1.Introduction – The introduction provides information and includes support from relevant recent literature. Adding more statistics related to women's poverty, entrepreneurship, and other aspects of the rural sector could further emphasize these points to the reader. At the end of the introduction, you could also briefly outline how the rest of the paper is organized.

2. Materials and methods: 

 2.1 - Study setting- well presented with figures

 2.2 – participants characteristics- ok. Tell us a bit about ‘Mujer 360’ in section 2.3.1. What training is included to develop which cognitive abilities or intellectual capacities? Then, we see assessment is worthwhile. Also, this leads to seeing the personal development indicators.

2.34 - Personal development indicators-  explain well with more than enough examples even However, it needs to show how this is used specifically in the context of Ecuador. 

3. Expected results: would like to see the achieved results with the research conducted.

4.Conclusions- This can be done far better with the results, which we cannot see.

 

References: OK. Check a bit more recent literature as well.

Author Response

One important point to mention: To address the reviewers' concern regarding the lack of empirical evidence, we have incorporated the results from a preliminary study conducted with 16 participants. This pre-pilot study provided valuable insights into the potential impact of our tailored business training program on rural women entrepreneurs in Ecuador. By presenting these initial findings, we aim to demonstrate the feasibility and relevance of our research, highlighting how the training interventions can positively influence agency, confidence, self-efficacy, and financial situation. The inclusion of these results strengthens the justification for our study protocol and underscores the practical significance and anticipated outcomes of the proposed full-scale study.

 

Comment:

The introduction provides information and includes support from relevant recent literature. Adding more statistics related to women's poverty, entrepreneurship, and other aspects of the rural sector could further emphasize these points to the reader. At the end of the introduction, you could also briefly outline how the rest of the paper is organized.

Response:

Thank you for your insightful comments. We have revised the introduction to incorporate relevant recent literature and provide comprehensive information on the topics mentioned. Additionally, we have introduced a new section in the literature review that specifically addresses “global and regional statistics” related to women's poverty, entrepreneurship, and other aspects of the rural sector. These additions aim to further emphasize the points you highlighted. We also provided a clearer organizational outline at the end of the introduction to guide the reader through the paper.

Comment:

Tell us a bit about ‘Mujer 360’ in section 2.3.1. What training is included to develop which cognitive abilities or intellectual capacities?

Response:

In accordance with your suggestion, in section 3.3.1, 'Mujer 360' training, we added insights into the training and development of cognitive abilities and intellectual capacities. This section details the specific training included in 'Mujer 360' aimed at enhancing various cognitive skills and intellectual capacities essential for personal and professional growth. 'Mujer 360' is a tailored training program that focuses on seven key areas to develop the cognitive abilities and intellectual capacities of rural women entrepreneurs. These areas include digital literacy and technology use, basic business skills, critical thinking and problem-solving, leadership and self-confidence, financial education, communication skills, time management and productivity, and associativity and teamwork. The program emphasizes practical and participatory methodologies, continuous support, and mentorship to reinforce the learning and application of these skills in their enterprises.

Comment:

Explain well with more than enough examples; however, it needs to show how this is used specifically in the context of Ecuador.

Response:

Thank you for your feedback. We have addressed this by adding a new section to the literature review that specifically discusses the application of our findings within the context of Ecuador (Section 2.2). This section now highlights examples and case studies relevant to the Ecuadorian context, providing a clearer understanding of our research's local implications.

Comment:

Would like to see the achieved results with the research conducted.

Response:

We have conducted a preliminary study with 16 participants and added a new section presenting the results and discussions. These additions now clearly outline the achieved results from our research, providing empirical evidence to support our findings.

Comment:

The conclusions can be done far better with the results, which we cannot see.

Response:

Thank you for your feedback. We have added a preliminary study to strengthened the results section to clearly present our findings. The conclusions have been revised to directly correlate with the results presented, providing a comprehensive overview of the implications and contributions of our study to the field.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article is interesting in terms of the analysis carried out and the topic addressed. What I noticed, however, is the fact that in the Materials and Methods section, the structure used by the authors is not very clear in the sense of clear boundaries between the Research Methodology part and the Literature review part. During the first reading, I did not manage to understand which part is combined with the other in order to highlight the aspects dealt with by the authors. I suggest to the authors to delimit more clearly the literature review part and the research methodology part into subsections and that each of them be numbered accordingly. I also noticed that the Literature review part is a bit poor, so I suggest the authors to improve this section.

Author Response

One important point to mention: To address the reviewers' concern regarding the lack of empirical evidence, we have incorporated the results from a preliminary study conducted with 16 participants. This pre-pilot study provided valuable insights into the potential impact of our tailored business training program on rural women entrepreneurs in Ecuador. By presenting these initial findings, we aim to demonstrate the feasibility and relevance of our research, highlighting how the training interventions can positively influence agency, confidence, self-efficacy, and financial situation. The inclusion of these results strengthens the justification for our study protocol and underscores the practical significance and anticipated outcomes of the proposed full-scale study.

Comment:

The structure used in the Materials and Methods section is not very clear in terms of clear boundaries between the Research Methodology part and the Literature Review part.

Response:

We acknowledge your observation. To improve clarity, we have revised the structure of the Materials and Methods section. We have added an entire new section for the Literature Review and we have delineated clear boundaries between the Research Methodology and Literature Review parts, ensuring a more distinct separation of these components for better readability and understanding.

Comment:

Suggests that the authors delimit more clearly the literature review part and the research methodology part into subsections, and that each of them be numbered accordingly.

Response:

Thank you for your suggestion. We have restructured the manuscript to include clear subsections within the Literature Review and Research Methodology parts. Each subsection is now numbered accordingly to enhance organization and facilitate navigation through the document.

Comment:

The Literature review part is a bit poor, so I suggest the authors to improve this section.

Response:

We appreciate your feedback on the literature review section. In response, we have added a new section to enhance this part. Moreover, we have included additional relevant studies, theoretical perspectives, and empirical evidence. These improvements aim to provide a more comprehensive and robust review of the literature pertinent to our study's objectives and context.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for improving the paper. Please consider the following comments to add more value to the manuscript:

Abstract

• The abstract is adequate, but including some key findings would enhance the paper.
• Keywords: OK

1. Introduction

• There are some improvements, but it still needs to clearly present the main research question and the objectives.
• Are you stating that the main research question is your objective?
• You mention what you do for one group: what about the other group?
• Clarify details about the questionnaires and other methods in the data and methods section.

2. Theoretical Background

• This section needs improvement. It currently appears to be mostly a literature review rather than a discussion of key theories.
• Ensure to include key theories and concepts related to women entrepreneurship.

2.3 Pre-Pilot Study

• Adding the pre-pilot study is a good idea. However, it may be better placed under materials and methods to explain how the participants or the sample were selected.
• Consider placing it after section 3.1 and before section 3.2.
• Connect it well to the discussion

3.3.2

• This section has improved.

3.3.3

• This section is okay.

4. Expected Results

• It would be beneficial to see the achieved results of the conducted research.

References

• The references are okay. However, consider including more recent literature.

Author Response

Response Letter to Reviewer

Abstract

• The abstract is adequate, but including some key findings would enhance the paper.

We appreciate your feedback on the abstract. We have revised it to include key findings:

“Women entrepreneurs in rural Ecuador face significant obstacles, including limited access to education, financial services, and business networks. Despite their vital role in the economy, gender inequalities hinder their success. This study protocol aims to evaluate the impact of a tailored business training program designed to empower rural women entrepreneurs and promote sustainable economic development. Aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of quality education (Goal 4), gender equality (Goal 5), and decent work and economic growth (Goal 8), the program will assess improvements in women's agency, confidence, and business performance. Key results include a 54% increase in perceived self-efficacy and a 200% increase in locus of control observed in the pre-pilot phase, indicating enhanced decision-making capacities and program effectiveness. Expected improvements in business performance will be measured by sales figures and financial growth, with anticipated positive impacts on SDG 8. The program will also track participation rates, with high enrollment and completion rates contributing to SDG 4. Additionally, financial stability and the number of engaged suppliers will be monitored, supporting SDG 8. By incorporating additional structural interventions, the study will offer insights into enhancing the empowerment of rural women entrepreneurs, creating a holistic impact that fosters both individual and community development.

1. Introduction

• There are some improvements, but it still needs to clearly present the main research question and the objectives.

We appreciate your suggestion. In the revised introduction, we have clarified the main research question and objective.

• Are you stating that the main research question is your objective?

Thank you for your suggestions. We have revised the text to distinguish clearly between the main research questions and the study's objectives. The research question is focused on evaluating the impact of the training on various dimensions such as agency, confidence, and business performance. The objectives are to assess the effectiveness of a tailored business training program and its impact on women's empowerment and economic growth.

 

• You mention what you do for one group: what about the other group?

We appreciate your input. In the revised introduction, we have clarified that the control group will not receive any interventions or support from our study. The control group will only be involved in providing initial and final data to compare against the trained group. This approach will allow us to observe the natural performance and progress of the control group without any intervention, which will help in assessing the specific impact of the training interventions on the trained participants. The primary aim is to determine whether the observed changes in the trained group are due to the training program or if similar changes might occur without any support.

• Clarify details about the questionnaires and other methods in the data and methods section.

Thank you for pointing this out. We have streamlined the methodology section to remove excessive details and have relocated those specifics to the Data and Methods section as suggested. The revised introduction provides a general overview of the methodologies, including the use of pre- and post-training questionnaires and follow-up surveys to assess the impact of the training.

2. Theoretical Background

• This section needs improvement. It currently appears to be mostly a literature review rather than a discussion of key theories.
• Ensure to include key theories and concepts related to women entrepreneurship.

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have made significant revisions to the theoretical background section to focus more on key theories related to women entrepreneurship. We have included Social Feminist Theory, which highlights how social structures and norms influence women's entrepreneurial behavior. Moreover, Human Capital Theory has been added to emphasize the importance of education and training in enhancing women's skills and knowledge, thereby improving their economic outcomes. Additionally, Self-Efficacy Theory by Albert Bandura has been integrated to underscore how belief in one's ability positively influences women's entrepreneurial intentions. We also discuss risk aversion to explain gender differences in risk tolerance and behavioral control, and sustainable entrepreneurship to illustrate how women entrepreneurs tend to prioritize social and environmental values alongside economic ones. Finally, we have included empowerment to define how the process of gaining power and control over their lives and decisions is crucial for women's effective economic participation. We hope these enhancements address your concerns and improve the theoretical foundation of our manuscript.

2.3 Pre-Pilot Study

• Adding the pre-pilot study is a good idea. However, it may be better placed under materials and methods to explain how the participants or the sample were selected.
• Consider placing it after section 3.1 and before section 3.2.
• Connect it well to the discussion

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have revised the manuscript to incorporate your suggestions. Specifically, we have moved the pre-pilot study to the materials and methods section to better explain how the participants or the sample were selected. Additionally, we have placed it after section 3.1 and before section 3.2, as recommended. Moreover, we added some of this discussion to the section four of expected results

 

4. Expected Results

• It would be beneficial to see the achieved results of the conducted research.

We appreciate your suggestion to provide the achieved results of the conducted research. We have now included the results of our pre-pilot study in the manuscript to offer a comprehensive overview of our findings.

References

• The references are okay. However, consider including more recent literature.

Thank you for your suggestion to include more recent literature. We have carefully reviewed the available specific literature on women entrepreneurship in rural areas, which extends up to 2023. In our revised manuscript, we have already incorporated eight references from this period to ensure the relevance and currency of our theoretical background. Additionally, to further enrich our discussion, we have included 4 recent references from 2024, specifically focusing on broader themes of entrepreneurship. These additions aim to provide a more comprehensive and up-to-date perspective on the subject.

 

Thank you once again for your constructive feedback, which has significantly contributed to the enhancement of our manuscript.

Best regards,

The authors

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx