Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper shows an overview of problems related to the goal of universal electrification. It shared approx. 16% of contents with the mentioned paper https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29023.

The contents is rather similar to a report than a scientific paper or review.

It is difficult for me to judge the quality of the paper because its contents and style lie far from the mainstream of papers that I usually review. However I can't deny the value and utility and possible popularity of such publications. Therefore I recommend publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has reviewed the decentralized electrification history, summarize it into phases and provide the takeaway from them to support universal electrification efforts. 

While it is a good summary of the topic, I do not see enough originality for it to be called an original article. Thus, changing it into a "review" paper would be a wiser choice. 

Additionally, while the paper claims to be covering worldwide, there is quite a bit of imbalance of the western and the eastern world covered. Please check the detailed comments attached as notes in the paper and respond to all of the points. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript, " A retrospective analysis of energy access with a focus on the role of mini-grids", reviewed electrification efforts in different countries. The authors conduct the literature review of the power system evolution in different cases. Then the author defined the 4 phases for the process of electrification. In the end, the authors summarized the key questions that the modern policymakers face, and some analysis was conducted over these questions. Overall, the major conclusions of this manuscript are quite obvious and supported by literature and analysis. In addition, the design of concept and analysis were completed in a diligent manner. There are several suggestions for the author to improve the quality of the manuscript.

It will help the audient to better understand the development of electrification if the author could add some graphs or charts. The authors need to add the conclusion section to the manuscript to summarize and highlight this work. The format of the reference needs to be revised according to the journal’s requirement.

As such, I recommend the manuscript can be accepted with revision.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

General comment: This paper presents the history of power systems evolution with a specific focus on mini-26 grids. Selected high- and middle- income countries are investigated and possible lessons are drawn.
Introduction: The Introduction should be improve focusing on the aim of the paper, main methods, main results and few recommendations based on empirical results. The authors should explain more their research novelty compared to previous studies from literature.
Methodology: Describe more the methodology. Indicate limits and advantages of methods. Indicate alternative methods. Provide practical comments to introduce the methods.
Results: More comments of the results are required.
Discussion: Interpretations of the results are provided, but a more critical position is required.
Bibliography/References: Add recent references, especially those from journals indexed in international databases, WoS and Scopus.
Decision: Accept with corrections.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have responded to the comments appropriately and the quality have improved.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for all provided comments and suggestions as well as for the positive evaluation of the paper. We have performed a grammar/spell check as requested and have now uploaded the manuscript with minor revisions.

Reviewer 3 Report

The author has revised the manuscript, and it can be accepted in the present form.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for all provided comments and suggestions as well as for the positive evaluation of the paper. We have performed a grammar/spell check as requested and have now uploaded the manuscript with minor revisions.

Reviewer 4 Report

minor comments in the pdf 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for all provided comments and suggestions as well as for the positive evaluation of the paper. We have elaborately updated bibliography and performed a grammar/spell check as requested.