Crises around Concepts of Hospitality in the Mountainous Region of Svaneti in the North of Georgia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

While this is a very interesting paper, the authors should improve the rationale of the literature review in terms of the placement of the article in tourism research. Also, they should develop the data analysis to allow replicability. The authors should expand the theoretical and practical implications, limitations and opportunities for further research in the conclusion.

Author Response

Dear colleague,
Thank you very much for your feedback. I have deepened the argumentation regarding my qualitative-reconstructive approach. I am not sure if I have understood you correctly regarding the desire for some kind of quantification of the data. This is of course not possible with my approach, as is always the case with descriptive approaches oriented towards ethnographic methods. I am a qualitative social researcher in the tradition of symbolic interactionism, not a quantitative social researcher.  I hope that my supplementary explanations are understandable.
I have greatly expanded the references to studies from tourism research to include studies in other regions in order to classify my own investigation; of course, I am familiar with many of these studies. However, I have limited myself in the first version because I wanted to concentrate on Georgian researchers. I have explained all this in detail. I have also adapted the conclusions to this and to other studies from tourism research.
Best regards and many thanks for your efforts

Reviewer 2 Report

The article deals with an interesting and current topic of tourism development in the mountain rural area in Georgia. This is a qualitative study, using resources from the Internet and interviews with local people.

The article is processed at the required level: it has a suitable structure, uses a number of sources of professional literature, has a well-chosen methodology, correctly presented results, and appropriately discussed conclusions. The results of the study can be compared with the situation in many similar regions in the world; The author captures the main phenomena well and compares the opinions of visitors and locals. The text is coherent and I never felt that it was missing any important information.

Overall, I consider the article to be very good and I recommend it for publication.

Author Response

Dear colleague,
Thank you for your positive feedback and your assessment of the qualitative approach to the field. I have deepened the argumentation in this regard because reviewer 1 requested a quantitative treatment of the data. As you rightly point out, this is, of course, not possible in my approach.  I hope that this is now more comprehensible to reviewer 1.
In addition, the references were expanded to include studies in other regions in order to classify my own research.
Best regards