Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript is focuses on analyzing current status of the supportive business dealing with grass bioeconomy in different European countries. Authors use a multiple case study and try to find connection between the successful practices in the business models and business environment.

The topic is of high importance and fit well the journal scope. The data interpretation included comprehensive analysis and authors refers to the most recent papers in the field as well as fundamental publications. Figures and tables are well presented and pertinent. English is concise and correct.

The manuscript is worth publishing in the selected journal in its current version but I recommend some minor changes (improvements).

To have a comprehensive picture, author are expected to address the following:

1. What type of innovations are taken into account, and what “role of academia” is envisaged? It remains unclear from the text
2. What are the differences between the grasslands in different countries (in terms of climate and predominant grass species grown), and how it affects the choice or a vision on the alternative agro-business ? Authors take examples from (among others) the South (Spain or Romania) and North (Denmark, Sweden) of the continent with different agricultural traditions and practices. In addition to geographical diversity, the historical and cultural diversity is huge, if you consider Romania vs Denmark. This point must be highlighted, even if it was not a direct part of the study.
3. One of the feature so the globalization is the transfer of goods, including biomass. According to this, it is a question whether the business models discussed or envisaged are oriented strictly to the locally grown/consumed biomass, or import-oriented raw material and/or export-oriented products? And if they are local, whether these species are historically grown in the region, or they are recently cultivated (and why they we brought to that area?).

These questions may give a comprehensive vision on the business development for sustainable bioeconomy.

Author Response

Many thanks for your valuable input and recommendations.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

all comments can be found in attached file.

With regards

 

Reviewer

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

a lot of work has been done to improve you text.

Now, I consider the version with your changes in this form suitable for publication in Sustainability Journal, despite of fact many of ethical questions are touched, not analyzed. I appreciate additional Chapter 4.

Thank you for your effort.

Reviewer