Transforming Consumer Behavior: Introducing Self-Inquiry-Based and Self-Experience-Based Learning for Building Personal Competencies for Sustainable Consumption

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the possibility to read your manuscript.

Some comments or suggestions:

- the keywords are too long;

- very good and rigorous: "2. Theoretical background";

- well explanation of: "extracted five major learning effects among the students’ reports that were not directly related to their consumption." (p. 13).

Author Response

Thank you for your positive feedback on this article. We changed the keyword „higher education for sustainable development“ to „education for sustainable development“. Regarding the other key words, we do not see how to shorten them, as they all represent central concepts and methods of this article and do not seem to be exchangeable. We are thankful for concrete suggestions in this regard.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for your manuscript. I have a number of comments:

·     Please send your paper to an English Science Editor, there are a number of sentences that need to be improved

·     Line 50 ‘Looking at Higher education…’ this is rather colloquial

·      I am not fond of the first person singular or plural, but please check with the editors

·     Please remove ‘in fact’ line 111

·     Please check some of the newest papers on competences, some published in ‘Sustainability’ e.g. Paul Vare’s paper, or Lozano et al.’s

·     IBL and EBL seem pretty close to the double-loop and triple-loop learning proposed by Argyris and Senge, and the action ones proposed by Doppelt, please check these, the same as inquisitive and discerning learning

·      I strongly advise that you introduce the University of Leuphana to the readers. Your paper will be read by people all over the world, who may not know where it is and its characteristics

·     What is the context of the seminar? Who attended? Why and how were they planned?

·     Figure 2 might be better circular, otherwise it implies that it neds in step 5 and this does not feedback into 1

·      I miss a ‘conclusions’ paragraph, you have done nice work, but I miss the answer to the question ‘so what’? what is your contribution to competences, learning, etc.?

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you very much for your helpful comments. You find our detailed responses to your remarks in the file attached.

Very best,

the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for your corrections. I insist that you must send your paper to an English Science Editor, there are instances that really need polishing, and you want to be very proud of your work. I still miss a description of the university, where is it located, how many students and staff does it have, how many and which faculties does it have, etc.?

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

thank you once again for your feedback. The manuscript was now revised by a proof-reader. Addtitional information about the university are now provided in lines 453-456.

Kind regards,

the authors