A Combined IO-DEMATEL Analysis for Evaluating Sustainable Effects of the Sharing Related Industries Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. Please clearly state what is the purpose of your research. Currently you only ask questions, but questions should lead to aim.
2. The research gap has to be specified more in-depth. Refer to the direct problem of your research (the one defined by your research aim) and support it with references. 
3. What are the implication of your research for science? You refer to 2 different theories. Pls explain in detail how your results enrich those theories.
4. What are the implications of your research results for policty makers? What is the practical value?
5. Reader can get lost when reading the text. Try to keep your way of reasoning as simple as possible without the use of unnecassary extra keywords.
6. Pls explain in detail why you concentrated on these specific sectors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This study has a good degree of potential to be considered for publication.

However, there are certain critical aspects regarding how the work and manuscript are structured and organized that the authors should address, before being accepted for publication:

1 - A major English language revision should be undertaken. I recommend a Proof Reading professional to revise it. There are crass grammar and spelling errors. Example: page 2 - The fiveth section gives profound discussion and policy suggestions based on the calculation results. Finally, the last section summarizes the conclusions and shortcomings. - is not "fiveth", but rather "fifth".

2 - Abstract

The Research Question (RQ) should be clearly stated (i.e. "This research aims to answer the following research question: .............");

3 - Introduction

There should be a phrase at the end of this section clearly stating:

"This research is organized as follows: the second section clarifies the relationship between sharing economy and sustainable production and consumption from the theoretical level and reviews previous studies. The third section illustrates the improvements on the I/O-DEMATEL method of embed-ding the I/O tables and enumerates the related calculation indexes. The fourth section describes data and material sources. The fifth section gives profound discussion and policy suggestions based on the calculation results. Finally, the last section summarizes the conclusions and shortcomings.;

4 - Literature review 

This section, as it is now, looks very, very poor. It is far from being completed. One page of literature review about the SE is simply not enough. I, therefore, highly recommend the authors add much more literature about the SE. A scientific paper/research simply cannot be accepted for publication, with such a lack of density of literature review. That is one of the paramount to take into account upon revising and considering a scientific work to be accepted for publication.

5 - The Results and Discussion

This section should be divided into, rather, 2 distinct sections: "5 - Results" and "6 - Discussion".

The "Results" should be addressed as they are: simply displaying them. That's it. 

And, upon displaying the results, then, one is able to discuss them, by confronting them with the literature review, but in another distinct section: the "Discussion".

Also, right at the beginning of the "Discussion" section, there should be a phrase, clearly stating: "Considering our research question - .......... -,  our findings reveal that ......".

6 - Conclusions and future research directions 

Although it is not critical, I also recommend that there should 2 distinct sections here: "Conclusions" and "Future Research Directions".

 

I wish all the best to the authors in succeeding to publish their work.

Academic regards.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The study is very interesting and appraises important subject of sharing economy. Authors examined the evolution of sharing-related industries' contributions to the national economy, their interactive effects on other sectors, and industrial structure changes. The comparative analysis of I/O cross-sectional data in 2007 and 2018 was used to obtain that aim.

However, there are some shortcomings that require improvement. It is essential to complete the article for the elements as following:

• The authors did not specify the main purpose of the article. This information should be included both in the abstract and in the research methodology section.
• There is a noticeable lack of research questions and hypotheses that should be verified on the basis of the conducted analyses.
• When analysing the sharing economy literature, it is also worth noting the impact of the sharing economy on urban functions and on improving the quality of life of local communities. More on this topic can be found in, for example:

Szymańska A.I., (2021), The Importance of the Sharing Economy in Improving the Quality of Life and Social Integration of Local Communities on the Example of Virtual Groups, "Land", vol. 10, iss. 7, pp. 1-17

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for your appreciated efforts in addressing my main points of concern.

The article is, now, much closer to a final acceptance for publication.

However, there still are some adjustments that should be addressed. Namely:

A - Regarding the point number 2 (Abstract - The Research Question (RQ) should be clearly stated (i.e. "This research aims to answer the following research question: ............."), I am sorry, but you still haven't addressed it as I asked you for. Meaning: I don't read in your revised Abstract a clear mention of "This research aims to answer the following research question(s): .............". Instead, you added a very broad overall aim of the study: "(...) The study aims to explore the complex sustainable impact of sharing-related activities (...)".

Again, I kindly ask you to, clearly and specifically, write a sentence stating something like "This research aims to answer the following research question(s): .............".

A reader, yes, understands that the overall aim is to "explore the complex sustainable impact of sharing-related activities". But, at the end of the day, what is/are the Research Question(s) the authors are seeking to answer? As it is now, it remains unclear what is being tried to be answered... Is it: "what is the sustainable impact of sharing-related activities?" ----- And, if so, the impact of sharing-related activities on what?... It is not clear. Do I make myself clear? Thank you.

 

Final note: although the section on Literature review should still be improved with much more literature about the SE, I accept that this section is now meeting a minimum level to be acceptable. Thank you for your efforts in adding more literature.

Given that these changes are well addressed, I wish you all the best in, finally, succeeding in publishing this work. Well done.

Academic regards.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx