Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This work appears original and interesting, as it focuses attention on one of the main challenges to be currently managed: the implementation of tools based on CE concepts. However, minor revisions are suggested to improve the clearness and the completeness of the work.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

This work appears original and interesting, as it focuses attention on one of the main challenges to be currently managed: the implementation of tools based on CE concepts. However, minor revisions are suggested to improve the clearness and the completeness of the work.

 

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for his/her positive comment and valuable suggestions. We improved the manuscript taking into consideration all Reviewer's indication.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript sent for review, with the theme Circular Economy and Food System: A Review of Principal Measuring Tools, is well done, the authors managing to develop a material that fits the specifics of the journal. Methodologically, this review respects the academic rules and the results obtained are appreciable. The material can be published, but I can give a few recommendations to the authors.

For a better visibility of the article, avoid using the same words or expressions for keywords as in the title.

Arrange the material according to the rules of the journal. (L704, 710, 713, 723)

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for his/her positive comment and valuable suggestions. We improved the manuscript taking into consideration all Reviewer's indication.

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript by Fassio and Chirilli presents a systematic review that summarized the indicators, assessment tools, and monitoring tools in the circular economy for the food system. By analysis of the literature, the authors propose limitations and solutions which are valuable for future studies and applications. The manuscript is well written with clear logic and fluent language. I think this manuscript is useful for broad researchers in the field of food systems and circular economy.

I find some mistakes in reference citation: In Line 771 the citation of [67] seems to be wrong and it should probably be [79]. Please carefully check each citation in the manuscript and make sure all citations are correct. The reference list also has some incomplete information, for example, references 10, 13, 14, etc. lack the page numbers/article numbers.

Author Response

We thank the Reviewer for his/her positive comment and valuable suggestions. We improved the manuscript taking into consideration all Reviewer's indication. 

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf