A Multi-Faceted Approach to Improving Public Services in Low-Income Housing in Windhoek, Namibia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments to Authors:

The manuscript is very well structured and well written, but I have few concerns given as follows:

1.     In introduction sections, the authors mentioned about sustainable housing and sustainable community but neglected literature about sustainable services which is the main topic of this study and research gap given in the manuscript in case of Namibia. The authors should explain about sustainable public services, the absence of those services in Namibia, and finally, the approach to improve such services.

2.     Regarding demographics, females represent higher ratio compared to males. How would you justify when most of previous studies indicate that females are less responsive to surveys (Thomsen & Sanders, 2020). Is there any cultural differences or females in Namibia are more responsive because population ratio of Namibia is 52% to 48% between females and males respectively. Explain it in methodology section.

3.     I suggest the authors to include a separate limitations sections since this study is focused on three constituencies of Namibia. How will the authors explain the generalizability of this study?

4.     The study requires extensive proofreading.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

The responses to your comments are in the attached document

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, Kindly find attached the response to your comments Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article concerns a contemporary important issue, which has been presented in a way that guarantees the interest of scientists from various disciplines: economics, management, social policy, demography and practitioners from the local economy level.

The study was written in a clear, transparent and understandable way, without taking anything away from its scientific dimension.

I consider the application of the method to be correct. The literature review is sufficient and extensive. The conclusions are justified by the presented results.

In my opinion, it can be published in this form. I congratulate the authors and the managing editor.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Kindly find attached the response to your comments

Best regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The content of the submitted manuscript is good, but the current form's presentation does not fulfill the journal requirements. Modification is needed to consider for publication.

  - Title of the paper

The title of the paper looks good, but at the same time, it can be modified to represent the manuscript in a better way.

Abstract

-          The abstract is not well written

-          You should include some of the main findings in the abstract section.

Abstract should have a conclusion of the study.

Introduction  

-                 The objective of the study is also not clearly mentioned.

·       Add more on the basics of the problem in the introduction

·       More details about COVID-19 are required in the introduction section.

·       The author should focus mainly on the importance and significance of the study.

·       I suggest the author demonstrate what the paper adds to the current literature. and what new knowledge is added by this study?

Add the uniqueness of this study compared to other studies discussing the same issue.

-Discuss the merits and limitations of the technique applied.

Conclusion

-          Please rewrite the conclusion with the proper explanation in the R & D.

 

References

 

Reference section should be increased with number of recent studies. I would like to suggest to author to include following published article to improve the quality of articles, these are

 

Addressing the relevance of COVID–19 pandemic in nature and human socio-economic fate. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment 2022 (10.1007/s00477-022-02191-5).

 

Analysis of the health, economic and environmental impacts of COVID-19: The Bangladesh perspective.  Geosystems and Geoenvironment. 2022 (10.1016/j.geogeo.2021.100011).

 

Other comments:

English editing is needed in some parts of the manuscript.
Abbreviations should be explained before the introduction.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Kindly find attached the response to your comments

Best regards

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript seems fit to get published. Accepted please.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed all of my concerns, therefore, I recommend this manuscript can be published in its present form.