Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for your manuscript.

I would like to suggest the authors to:

1 - Write the implications of the research within the abstract in a much explicit way.

2 - The policy recommendation is interesting. Yet, it would be better if the authors could provide some citations to it.

Thank you.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

All the best

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I have carefully reviewed this manuscript and below is my decision.

- The topic is quite interesting, however, the explanation on the originality of the study is insufficient. This paper, needs to highlight clearly the originality of the study.

- How does the paper contribute to the extant literature on the subject?

- This paper needs a comprehensive literature review. The literature review should be strengthened considerably by including some of the seminal conceptual and empirical contributions to the field. The hypothesis address this issue and the main contribution to literature should be explained.

- Why were the variables included in the model with logarithms? Should be explained in detail.

- Discussion should be developed.

 

It can be published after corrections are made.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

It can be published.