Pilot Assessment of Knowledge and Compliance with the Sustainable Development Goals as Drivers for Strengthening BioTrade

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.the title of the article does not match the abstract

2. the abstract is very vague, about everything, does not reflect the essence and key achievements of the article

3. The relevance of the article is based on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). General information is given without reference to the topic of the article. there is very little information about BioTrade, it would be useful to build the introduction of the article specifically on the relationship between BioTrade and the goals of sustainable development, focusing on the relevance of each element and synthesis.

4. in the results section, there is a lack of analytics related to the synthesis of sustainable development goals and BioTrade. The authors analyzed everything separately, and did not show what effect is possible from the combination.

5. the discussion section is well written, enough universities are analyzed with their analytics and critical comments regarding the results obtained.

6. In the conclusions section, the authors proposed to implement educational initiatives and comprehensive programs to strengthen knowledge and promote a more sustainable life among the university community using the available resources. But the authors did not provide an analysis in the previous sections, with the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed initiatives.

Author Response

Comments 1: the title of the article does not match the abstract

Response 1: We agree with this comment. Therefore, We have modified the entire abstract.

Comments 2: The abstract is very vague, about everything, does not reflect the essence and key achievements of the article.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out, The abstract was restructured on lines 11-24.

Comments 3: There is very little information about BioTrade, it would be useful to build the introduction of the article specifically on the relationship between BioTrade and the goals of sustainable development, focusing on the relevance of each element and synthesis.

Response 3: We are very grateful for this valuable comment. Information on BioTrade is added, and the relationship between ODS and BioTrade is made in lines 81-98 of the introduction.

Comments 4: In the results section, there is a lack of analytics related to the synthesis of sustainable development goals and BioTrade. The authors analyzed everything separately, and did not show what effect is possible from the combination.

Response 4: We appreciate this observation and have added: The effect of combining the SDGs and BioTrade is analyzed in lines 329-335 of the results section.

Comments 5: In the conclusions section, the authors proposed to implement educational initiatives and comprehensive programs to strengthen knowledge and promote a more sustainable life among the university community using the available resources. But the authors did not provide an analysis in the previous sections, with the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed initiatives.

Response 5: Thank you for pointing out this information gap in the manuscript. We have remedied this with:  An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed initiatives is provided in line 475-479 of the conclusions section.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article "Pilot Assessment of Knowledge and Compliance with the Sustainable Development Goals as Drivers for Strengthening BioTrade" addresses the level of knowledge that students, teachers, and administrative staff at the Ikiam Amazon Regional University in Ecuador have about the SDGs, with a particular focus on strengthening BioTrade.

The authors conducted and analyzed a questionnaire survey directed at students, teachers, and administrative staff, along with expert interviews. The questionnaire survey allowed for the identification of differences between these groups, and the expert interviews enabled the delineation of strategies for scaling BioTrade within the Sustainable Development Goals framework at Ikiam University.

The article covers a topic relevant to the Journal of Sustainability.

Strengths of this study:

-       The topic of the paper is highly significant in the context of Sustainable Development Goals and BioTrade.

-       The methods applied are appropriate for the research objectives.

-       The research results are presented clearly and comprehensively.

-       The bibliographic review is up-to-date.

-       The paper is easy to read.

 

Suggestions for improvement include:

1.       The structure of the article needs improvement; it is too fragmented.

2.       The introduction is too long; the authors need to revise this section. It should be shortened and not divided into parts.

3.       Section 2: Research Questions and Objectives should be moved to the end of the introduction without creating a separate section.

4.       In the revised version of the article, Section 2 should contain the literature review. Elements of the introduction can be included and expanded here. In the current form of the article, the literature review section is entirely absent.

5.       The conclusions should include the limitations of the study.

6.       The numbering of the discussion and conclusions sections should be corrected (they should be sections 5 and 6).

In my opinion, this paper qualifies to be published in the Journal of Sustainability with these major changes.

Author Response

Comments 1: The structure of the article needs improvement; it is too fragmented. The introduction is too long; the authors need to revise this section. It should be shortened and not divided into parts.

Response 1: We greatly appreciate your comment. Therefore, the introduction was restructured.

Comments 2: Section 2: Research Questions and Objectives should be moved to the end of the introduction without creating a separate section.

Response 2: We strongly agree with this comment. The objectives were included in the introduction on lines 125-132.

Comments 3: The conclusions should include the limitations of the study.

Response 3: Yes, you are quite right. The study's limitations are included in sections 501-505 of the conclusions section.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The paper presents an evaluating the state of knowledge and compliance of students, teachers and administrative staff, with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at the Ikiam Amazon Regional University, with a focus on strengthening BioTrade through a survey. And interview. The topic is good, paper is well written. My comments are:

 

 

1-       A definition of bio trade should be added

2-       Please add a methodology diagram to present the methodology followed in this study

3-       is there any study about the knowledge level at high education institute in Ecuador?  Literature review should be added about the studies on the same topic!

4-       Novelty of the paper should be mentioned in the paper

5-       Is there any course on sustainability topic offerered at Ikiam university? Authors should give more details regarding the sustainability courses, activities and initiatives at the university

6-       Figure 2 should be Table 2.

7-       In line 211-212: The results showed a statistically significant difference between groups with a p-value of 0.001! this sentence should be in the result parts! How we can conclude before analyzing the results

8-       Limitation of the study should be presented!

9-       The population participated in the study are from 3 careers: Ecosystem, BioTrade, Sustainable Architecture! Is there any difference between these careers in term of knowledge on SDs?

 

 

Author Response

Comments 1: A definition of bio trade should be added

Response 1: Thank you very much for this important comment. The definition of BioTrade is added on line 84-90 of the introduction section.

Comments 2: Please add a methodology diagram to present the methodology followed in this study

Response 2: We strongly agree with your comment. A methodological diagram of the research is added on line 231 in section 2.

Comments 3: is there any study about the knowledge level at high education institute in Ecuador?  Literature review should be added about the studies on the same topic!

Response 3: Thanks for pointing this out. The introduction section adds information on studies on the subject on lines 53-59.

Comments 4: Novelty of the paper should be mentioned in the paper

Response 4: We agree with this comment. This is mentioned in line 57-65 of the introduction section.

Comments 5: Is there any course on sustainability topic offerered at Ikiam university? Authors should give more details regarding the sustainability courses, activities and initiatives at the university

Response 5: I totally agree with your observation. This is included in line 406-410 of the discussion section.

Comments 6: Figure 2 should be Table 2.

Response 6: Thanks. This was corrected on line 203.

Comments 7: In line 211-212: The results showed a statistically significant difference between groups with a p-value of 0.001! this sentence should be in the result parts! How we can conclude before analyzing the results

Response 7: Thanks for your helpful comment. This was corrected on line 210.

Comments 8: Limitation of the study should be presented!

Response: We totally agree. The study's limitations are included in sections 501-505 of the conclusions section.

Comments 9: The population participated in the study are from 3 careers: Ecosystem, BioTrade, Sustainable Architecture! Is there any difference between these careers in term of knowledge on SDs?

Response 9: thank you for your comment. However, the research did not include a separate analysis of the careers but focused specifically on general student, faculty, and administrative staff populations.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper explores the levels of awareness among students, faculty, and administrative staff at Ikiam University in the Ecuadorian Amazon region regarding the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It also discusses strategies for integrating the BioTrade profession effectively into the institution's SDG framework. Employing a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative data, the study found limited understanding of the SDGs within the university community, with significant disparities in knowledge levels among different groups. Overall, the paper suggests a certain level of significance, indicating it is potentially publishable pending several modifications.

 

In the background section, further discussion of research gaps in existing literature or how this study supplements existing research could strengthen the necessity and novelty of the research.

 

The methods section should ensure it provides sufficient detail to allow other researchers to replicate the experiment, including specific criteria for sample selection, detailed procedures for data collection, and a complete description of the statistical analysis. How many samples did the authors collect in total?

 

Since the authors employed a mixed-methods approach, how are the quantitative studies and interview studies related? How do they demonstrate a close connection?

 

Regarding Tables 3, 4, and 5, should commas (",") be replaced with periods (".")?

Author Response

Comments 1: In the background section, further discussion of research gaps in existing literature or how this study supplements existing research could strengthen the necessity and novelty of the research.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. This information is mentioned in lines 53-59 of the introduction section.

Comments 2: The methods section should ensure it provides sufficient detail to allow other researchers to replicate the experiment, including specific criteria for sample selection, detailed procedures for data collection, and a complete description of the statistical analysis. How many samples did the authors collect in total?

Response 2: Thank you for your constructive comment.  This is mentioned in line 224.

Comments 3: Since the authors employed a mixed-methods approach, how are the quantitative studies and interview studies related? How do they demonstrate a close connection?

Response 3: Yes, we agree with your comment. Therefore, we have modified lines 224-230 of section 2.

Comments 4: Regarding Tables 3, 4, and 5, should commas (",") be replaced with periods (".")

Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. Tables 3, 4, and 5 corrected it.

 

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Accept in present form.