An Overarching Model for Cross-Sector Strategic Transitions towards Sustainability in Municipalities and Regions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The reviewed paper discusses the municipal and regional governance in terms of sustainability. The Authors present FSSD (Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development) referring it to the PAR (Participatory Action Research). The idea considered in the paper looks very interesting and relevant especially for practicioners of local and regional development. However, the paper can be less interested for researchers. It rather presents some phenomenon than attempts to add some value to the theoretical aspects of sustainable development.

Regardless of paper target the Authors should:

• more precisely explain what it means 'eco-municipality' in Sweden. It is said that 111 out of 290 minucipalities in the country have this status but it means in fact;
• extend the selection of research area. I do not understand why Alanda is included as it is Finnish. Hence, the spatial context must be completely different; 
• be more precise when the analyse all eco-municipalities and only selected municipalities/regions under research;
• at page 6 there is information that there was conduced a survey to gain participants' view on the purpose of FSSD model and rational for its implementation and testing. W hat kind of survey it was? There are not too many details.

Moreover, on pages 3, 4, 5, 7, 17 there is a problem with references.  There is also an error with numeration in table 3.  

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

 

Thank you for your comments to help improve our paper!

 

Point 1: The idea considered in the paper looks very interesting and relevant especially for practitioners of local and regional development. However, the paper can be less interesting for researchers. It rather presents some phenomenon than attempts to add some value to the theoretical aspects of sustainable development.

Response 1: Thank you for this point of view, which made it possible for us to find room for improvement of the introduction to capture the research-aspect of strategic sustainable development, see line 77-85.

 

Point 2: More precisely explain what it means 'eco-municipality' in Sweden. It is said that 111 out of 290 municipalities in the country have this status but it means in fact;

Response 2: We have added some text on what it means to be an eco-municipality, see line 87-94:

 

Point 3: extend the selection of research area. I do not understand why Alanda is included as it is Finnish. Hence, the spatial context must be completely different;

Response 3: Thanks for pointing out this unclarity. We have now clarified this, see line 151-156.

 

Point 4: be more precise when the analyse all eco-municipalities and only selected municipalities/regions under research.

Response 4: See line 224-225. We have adjusted that sentence which now should clarify when data collection and analysis were focused on project partners and when material from a broader crowd of municipalities/regions were used.

 

Point 5: at page 6 there is information that there was conducted a survey to gain participants' view on the purpose of FSSD model and rational for its implementation and testing. What kind of survey it was? There are not too many details.

Response 5: We have clarified and added a sentence to provide some more information, see line 242-245. A sentence regarding the round table discussions were also added at the end of the same paragraph, see line 251-253.

 

Point 6: Moreover, on pages 3, 4, 5, 7, 17 there is a problem with references.  There is also an error with numeration in table 3. 

Response 6: Due to the paper had been formatted by the editorial office we cannot find these specific reference nor numeration problems. However, references have been adjusted although the paper and we hope they are now correct.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

A well structured and well written report on a relevant topic about how to achieve more sustainable communities. Can be published as it is, after amending some minor editorial shortcomings:

line 44: Vogel et al. is not in the final references list

lines 119, 144, 167, 254, 412: reference sources missing

line 173: first PAR step missing

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Thank you very much for your feedback and the opportunity to fix editorial shortcomings!

Point 1: line 44: Vogel et al. is not in the final references list

Response 1: Vogel et al. has been added to the reference list.

 

Point 2: lines 119, 144, 167, 254, 412: reference sources missing

Response 2:

119: References have been added/moved/deleted in the paragraph starting at line 117.

144: A reference has been added. See line 149.

167: A more specific reference has been added. See line 174.

254: This reference source is the same as the previous mentioned in the same paragraph, therefore we put “ibid”. See line 260.

412: Since this is an insight that project participants have contributed with, we do not think that a reference to previous work is possible. However, it was good that you pointed this out since their contribution could be confused with the reference given in the sentence before. We have now clarified by a line break. See line 406.

Point 3: line 173: first PAR step missing

Response 3: Our interpretation is that you were missing some of the steps that are visible in figure 3. We can see how it was confusing and have now adjusted accordingly. See line 181.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf