Next Article in Journal
Cybersociety and University Sustainability: The Challenge of Holistic Restructuring in Universities in Chile, Spain, and Peru
Next Article in Special Issue
Cooling Degree Models and Future Energy Demand in the Residential Sector. A Seven-Country Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
The Moral-Value Orientation—A Prerequisite for Sustainable Development of the Corporate Social Responsibility of a Security Organization
Previous Article in Special Issue
Affordability, Accessibility, and Awareness in the Adoption of Liquefied Petroleum Gas: A Case-Control Study in Rural India
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Improving Energy Poverty Measurement in Southern European Regions through Equivalization of Modeled Energy Costs

Sustainability 2020, 12(14), 5721; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145721
by Iñigo Antepara 1,*, Lefkothea Papada 2, João Pedro Gouveia 3, Nikolas Katsoulakos 2 and Dimitris Kaliampakos 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2020, 12(14), 5721; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145721
Submission received: 21 June 2020 / Revised: 10 July 2020 / Accepted: 14 July 2020 / Published: 16 July 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I enjoyed reading this paper, and believe the comparison on energy poverty calculation methods across different countries to the UK advances the energy justice literature. The authors present relevant tables to guide the reader through the results. There are some places where English language and sentence structure can be improved, particularly in the introduction. There are several run-on sentences (example line 96-102).

A few other comments.

1) The authors should spell out acronyms the first time used, and not use them in the abstract unless widely known.

2) line 80-81, should well isolated, be well-insulated?

3) Did the authors check for multicollinearity in their econometric models? 

 

Author Response

English language and style: Moderate English changes required. There are some places where English language and sentence structure can be improved, particularly in the introduction. There are several run-on sentences (example line 96-102).

 

Response: English language and style revised all through the text, not only in the introduction

 

Point 1: The authors should spell out acronyms the first time used, and not use them in the abstract unless widely known

 

Response 1: Corrected in the abstract

 

Point 2: line 80-81, should well isolated, be well-insulated?

 

Response 2: Corrected

 

Point 3: Did the authors check for multicollinearity in their econometric models? Since many of the

 

Response 3: Multicollinearity was not analysed. It is easy to know which variables can represent the same thing, as a pensioner, retired, over 65... and only one has been chosen. The variables have been displayed graphically, there is no perfect linearity. In addition, STATA detects these problems when calculating a regression.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is well written and novel. It covered a perspective of energy poverty measurement in Southern Europe. 

Author Response

English language and style: English language and style are fine/minor spell check required

 

Response: English language and style revised all through the text, not only in the introduction

Back to TopTop