Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper is extremely topical. The methodology is well explain.

A short introductory text should be written between section 2.1. and 2.1.1.

Some improvement of the discussion section are suggested (to gain in quality). Authors should emphasized the applicative potentials of the study and the achieved results for the Vietnam's tourism sector and go deeper on the conclusions to extract, keeping in mind the objectives of the paper.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is interesting and presents a recurring analysis in the literature, but always useful. In general, it is a work well done, well referenced and well explained, both methodology and results. Only slight corrections or presentation suggestions could be made:

• The first thing is that citations are not usually put in the abstract.
• You should wonder if Figures 3, 4, 5 and 6 could not be removed and replaced by a table.
• Figures 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 could be put together into a single full page figure.
• I think there are no limitations of the work mentioned in the conclusions section, and it would be nice to do so.
• References spacing needs revision.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf