Employment or Development in a Semi-Peripheral Region: The Roadrunner Paradigm
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
The article addresses very important and current issues. A fairly synthetic but logically structured review of the literature on the subject was made. The authors mainly used literature in Spanish. It should be expanded to include references from foreign literature.
Overall, I find the study quite interesting.
I recommend some changes to take into consideration:
1) The introduction is too long. An individual part, devoted to the review of the literature on the subject, should be separated accordingly.
2) I highly rate all the content included in section 2.1. Premises, however, in my opinion, there is a considerable lack of attempt to take into account the changes taking place in 2016-2020.
3) Part 2.2.2. The statistical sources has been divided into a very large number of short chapters and subsections, which makes it difficult for the reader to follow the main idea of the article. It is worth considering introducing summaries in the form of tables.
4) The article is quite long, consider reducing its volume.
5) Part 5. Conclusions is too synthetic. You should, inter alia, indicate if and how the results of the presented research can be related to trends and relations in local development of other regions / countries.
6) Limitations and future research lines should be included.
Kind regards
Author Response
Please, see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please:
- Check the joined words / characters
- Improve research hypotheses, make them more specific and clear
- Revome empty spaces L836-L842; L1057-1063; L1194-1199; L1334-1343;
- Remove the reference model from la last 2 pages L1644 to the end
- Make the figure 9 more visible
- Extend conclusions section
- Add statistical data analysis methods
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The aim of the study:
This paper examines the relationship between the employment policies and the evolution of the productive system between 1975 and 2015. Two former studies conducted the same task but for a shorter period between 1981 and 2011.
Research Methodology:
A case study of a semi-peripheral land based on a narrative approach that summarizes newspaper reports and reports from other published sources.
Research Findings and Conclusions:
Individuals respond more to international events (such as globalization led deindustrialization) than to employment policies.
Demographic changes are relevant for understanding the labour market dynamics, and corporate culture determines the success of employment policies.
Employment policies failed to solve the endemic unemployment problem because the appropriate “business culture” was lacking. This culture or social capital encompasses networking, trust, competitive attitude and “territorial intelligence”, meaning adequate knowledge of the environment coupled with an entrepreneurial instinct to innovation.
One reason for the lack of such “business culture” was probably the absence of self-governance and a feeling of alienation.
Other reasons include (i) the attitude of the local actors (landlords) and (ii) low-quality institutions together with extractive capitalism.
Spontaneous initiatives of local entities spur local developments while a “big-push” from outside fails.
The entry of immigrants into unskilled activities and limited availability of high-quality employment coincided with the inertia on the productive fabric hindering innovation.
Supportive Evidence
Based on newspaper reports without specific details, the authors try to support their conclusions. Here are a few examples.
They report that landlords, who were local actors, typically preferred subsidies rather than promoting a productive sector for local development by facilitating the supply of water and electricity. Instead, the local actors delegated those tasks to the public sector or the external agents.
The 1984 agrarian reform was designed to create rural employment but failed. The local actors (the landlords) resisted it by preferring labour-saving production activities.
Subsequently, public-private initiatives reversed emigration and lowered the unemployment rate. However, those gains were not long-lasting because those initiatives ignored investment in developing the social capital of the locally isolated economy.
The development of the social capital of the local economy in the 1990s led to a noteworthy reduction in unemployment. Further, it coincided with the growth of female participation in the market, reflecting an improved social capital of the local economy.
However, the unemployment rate rose sharply during the global financial crisis (2007 – 2012). Authors blame it on the industrial restructuring, increased participation of women, and the influx of immigrants due to improved labour mobility, thanks to globalization.
The low level of skilled population was a critical constraint for economic development.
The conclusions are informative, although not surprising. However, the presentation of their supportive evidence needs a rigid structure. At the minimum, the authors should consider abbreviated headings that flow logically to develop various ideas in a step-by-step fashion.
The logical structure of presentations of conclusions and their supportive evidence should be such that a reader can easily comprehend them.
Unfortunately, it was tough for me to make sense of the underlying economic logic of this paper, even though the quality of written English was not an issue.
Most importantly, the authors must structure their narration of history to establish one point clearly and comprehensively before moving onto another.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Referee's Response to Authors' Response to the Referee Report
----------------------------------------------------------------
The current version has improved marginally. However, two main concerns remain.
A. Results and conclusions have not been presented systematically.
For example, the authors could improve the paper significantly by systematically establishing the following claim, which they made in their response:
"(i) The low level of skilled population was NOT a critical constraint for economic development. On the contrary, it was just the opposite. (ii) Local stakeholders (landlords) prefer activities that did not need a skilled population. (iii) They fostered a productive fabric more sensible to instability and attracted an unskilled population. (iv) This scenario led to a rise in unemployment, (v) especially during a global crisis."
By providing a simple heading to guide the reader, the authors could establish (i) - (v) sequentially to bolster their claim.
Instead, they follow a narrative style to structure their results in a step-by-step chronological fashion, claiming it to be the "IMRDC model" format, which, I believe, is used in writing reports, not journal articles. Such a style hindered developing their logical arguments clearly to support (i) - (v) and other claims. Consequently, their logical arguments come across in a somewhat convoluted way for the readers of journal articles.
B. Results are sometimes not surprising.
For example, the authors conclude after a lengthy discussion an obvious fact:
"Demographic changes are relevant for understanding the labour market dynamics."
A demographic transition that alters the distribution of skilled and unskilled labour could potentially change the balance between demand and supply. Such a transition could cause unemployment in the unskilled labour market while a shortage in the skilled labour market. However, there are no mentions of those nontrivially relevant facts.
Further, there is a typo: see page 17, line 648, Section 3.2 Demographic Transition NOT democratic transition.
Author claims in their response that
"There is a misunderstanding: subsidies were for unemployed people, not for landlords."
Please note employers, not the unemployed, receive the subsidy to support wage payment to keep workers employed.
However, some employers opt for a labour-saving technology rather than receiving wage subsidies from the government, and unemployment increases. That's also contributed to the ineffectiveness of the government's employment programme.
The legend in Figure 4 - please change to "Unemployed" and delete "s", and workers to "Employed". Please note the sum of those two equals "Active" or the "Labourforce". Please note that the steady growth of the labourforce implied that the numbers of employed and unemployed workers reflect a mirror image of each other.
Author Response
Please, see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
This version has marginally improved after fixing the typos and a few minor errors. The authors and I have different ideas about how to write a scholarly journal article. I have expressed my views. The authors have other ideas. I have no further comments.
