Promoting Women’s Economic Empowerment Through Economic Diplomacy: The Case of the Arab Gulf’s Free Trade Agreements
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1) I consider the article to be highly interesting and undoubtedly timely. From a scholarly perspective, it would be advisable to develop a strictly methodological section, in which the research gap is identified, the research problem is formulated, the aim of the study is defined, and at least three research questions are specified that the author(s) intend to address. It is also recommended to specify the research limitations at the end of this section.
2) Figure 1 does not indicate the total number of documents considered for the percentage calculation, nor the years from which these documents originate. This information can be included either in the figure title or in the caption below the figure.
3) As previously indicated, the article is scientifically interesting; however, from a practical standpoint, it relies solely on the analysis of documents. This approach does not reflect the actual impact of these documents on changes in the economy with respect to women. Addressing this issue would require referencing indicators of women's entrepreneurship at the beginning of the period when the documents were introduced and, for example, in 2024. Such a comparison would allow for an assessment of whether any improvement has occurred. At present, the article does not provide this insight. Therefore, it is recommended to consider incorporating quantitative data and indicators, rather than relying exclusively on document analysis.
4) It is also advisable to indicate the added value of the article and specify its nature—whether it is theoretical and cognitive, empirical, or utilitarian.
I extend my best wishes to the authors in their future research endeavors.
Author Response
We would like to thank the reviewer for the time and effort in providing constructive feedback for improving the manuscript. We have made the necessary changes as follows.
Comment 1) I consider the article to be highly interesting and undoubtedly timely. From a scholarly perspective, it would be advisable to develop a strictly methodological section, in which the research gap is identified, the research problem is formulated, the aim of the study is defined, and at least three research questions are specified that the author(s) intend to address. It is also recommended to specify the research limitations at the end of this section.
Response 1) We have simplified the title of section 3 to Methodolgy, we have clarified the research question and its sub-questions upfront, we have described the two steps of the methodological framework, and have added the limitations at the end of the section.
Comment 2) Figure 1 does not indicate the total number of documents considered for the percentage calculation, nor the years from which these documents originate. This information can be included either in the figure title or in the caption below the figure.
Response 2) The information on the number of documents was initially provided on line 154 with the analysis but it is indeed clearer to have the information directly with the figure, so we have added the information in the title of Figure 1.
Comment 3) As previously indicated, the article is scientifically interesting; however, from a practical standpoint, it relies solely on the analysis of documents. This approach does not reflect the actual impact of these documents on changes in the economy with respect to women. Addressing this issue would require referencing indicators of women's entrepreneurship at the beginning of the period when the documents were introduced and, for example, in 2024. Such a comparison would allow for an assessment of whether any improvement has occurred. At present, the article does not provide this insight. Therefore, it is recommended to consider incorporating quantitative data and indicators, rather than relying exclusively on document analysis.
Response 3) While we agree with the reviewer that such analysis would be highly relevant, we are unable to carry it out at this stage for two reasons. First, some of the agreements are too recent and have barely entered into force, which does not allow us to evaluate their effect. Second, exploring the basic women entrepreneurship data is unlikely to provide significant results, as changes can be due merely to domestic policy changes or to non-trade related factors. The relevant data should cover primarily the number and performance of exporting women-led businesses (and particularly SMEs) engaged in trade between the specific pairs of countries for which FTAs exist. Such data is not readily available and would require longitudinal primary data collection which is both very costly and very time-consuming. We would nevertheless consider seeking funds for a future research project on the topic, performing one round of initial data collection for benchmarking, followed by a second round maybe 5 years later to measure the medium-term impact of the FTAs. We have added this as limitation of our research and as avenue for future research.
Comment 4) It is also advisable to indicate the added value of the article and specify its nature—whether it is theoretical and cognitive, empirical, or utilitarian.
Response 4) The article is empirical in nature and we have added this clarification in line 54.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article studies whether the Gulf Countries are using their Free Trade Agreements to promote women’s economic empowerment. For this purpose, the author(s) review(s) their contents finding out that most of them actually do refer to this point. This is to be considered as a positive sign. However, the article also very clearly highlights that these references usually are limited to a sort of “benevolent acceptance” more than implying a real encouragement to women taking more economic responsibility and to becoming autonomous actresses in Economics. This is an important conclusion. However, this research would very much benefit from a follow up confronting its findings to empirical data about the role of women in economic life comparing the situation ex ante and ex post to the signing of those agreements.
Author Response
Comment 1) However, this research would very much benefit from a follow up confronting its findings to empirical data about the role of women in economic life comparing the situation ex ante and ex post to the signing of those agreements.
Response 1) We are grateful to the reviewer for the positive assessment of our work. We agree with the suggestion that a follow-up analysis looking at the empirical evidence would be a useful addition to the literature.
Ideally, the relevant data should cover primarily the number and performance of exporting women-led businesses (and particularly SMEs) engaged in trade between the specific pairs of countries for which FTAs exist. Such data is not readily available and would require longitudinal primary data collection, performing one round of initial data collection for benchmarking, followed by a second round maybe 5 years later to measure the medium-term impact of the FTAs. We have added this as limitation of our research and as avenue for future research.
