Social Acceptance of Forest-Based Bioeconomy—Swedish Consumers’ Perspectives on a Low Carbon Transition
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a very nice article on an important topic of social acceptance of forest-based bioeconomy. The article is well written using a novel approach of combining both STT and MLP methodologies. Some concerns on sampling exit due to choosing an interview location with a quite well defined psychographical profile rather than random sampling. Regardless a solid article I would recommend for publishing.
Author Response
Hi!
Please see the attachment!
Sincerely,
The authors
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Suggestions and comments for authors attached in separate file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Hi!
Please see the attachment!
Sincerely,
The Authors
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
General comments
The theoretical framework developed and case study presented in this work are very relevant in the context of the bio-based economy, and are valuable to be extrapolated to other studies. In this sense, I recommend the publication of the manuscript once the aspects detailed below are addressed.
Abstract
The abstract structure is appropriate; however, the section that describes the results is a little vague. I would suggest expanding it a bit more. Also, please indicate the type of methodology utilized following the statement of the objective of the work (Line 14). Finally, I recommend lines 14 – 16 (i.e., the results provide … are interconnected) to be the closing sentence of the abstract since they reflect the future implications of the research.
Introduction
Line 61: by "using materials" is it implied from the materials themselves? If so, I would suggest this rewording for clarity.
Line 70: duplicated word (remained, remains)
Line 92: please, note the double space between "aim" and "of"
Line 98: it is stated that conditions for "the" survey will be outlined; however, such survey has not yet been introduced before during the introduction. I would suggest introducing the reader to the survey and its objectives first.
Line 144 – 147: How does this work addresses the challenge highlighted regarding the lack of reciprocal influential powers between the different levels in the MLP?
Line 170: typo, "themarket"
Results
Line 312 – 313: The wording of the sentence might be sensitive for some audiences. I suggest rewording it.
Line 386 – 387: What was the rationale for asking this question? Did the survey explore the reasons why WMBs are perceived to have benefits over steel and concrete buildings?
Line 449: I consider it important to highlight that there is a niche of consumers willing to pay a premium for bio-based products marketed as sustainable despite their lower performance compared to traditional options. Indeed, companies are currently using sustainability as a marketing advantage and a feature for product differentiation (this agrees with the statements in lines 453 – 455). Such a trend is expected to increase in the near future. The references below provide an example of this situation in the segment of consumer hygiene products and could potentially extrapolate to the WMBs business as the statements from lines 458 – 459 suggest.
Wang, Y., Zambrano, F., Venditti, R., Dasmohapatra, S., De Assis, T., Reisinger, L., ... & Gonzalez, R. (2019). Effect of pulp properties, drying technology, and sustainability on bath tissue performance and shelf price. BioResources, 14(4), 9410-9428.
de Assis, Tiago, Lee W. Reisinger, Sudipta Dasmohapatra, Joel Pawlak, Hasan Jameel, Lokendra Pal, Dale Kavalew, and Ronalds W. Gonzalez. "Performance and sustainability vs. the shelf price of tissue paper kitchen towels." BioResources 13, no. 3 (2018): 6868-6892.
Line 487: review word order, "offering by" should be "by offering"
Line 488: in order to, instead of on order to
Conclusions
I suggest fully spelling FBB and WMBs in the conclusions once again, considering that this is one of the sections that some readers tend to read first when skimming through papers.
Line 510: What is implied by path dependency? Please, provide a definition of the term for readers that are not familiar with it. The same term is also mention in the abstract; however, it is not defined throughout the paper.
I think that the findings presented between lines 455 and 459 are very important since they suggest a more rapid acceptance of WMBs in the marketplace by consumers. Therefore, they are worth mentioning in the conclusions.
Author Response
Hi!
Please see the attachment!
Sincerely,
The authors
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
