Research on the Motivation Mechanism of Precise Poverty Alleviation in Rural Tourism in China
Janez Mekinc
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this paper borrowing the force analysis method of the slope model in physics was interesting
Author Response
Dear reviewer We are the authors of the paper (Manuscript ID: sustainability-1952006). Thank you very much for your review of the paper, your suggestions helped a lot in revising the paper. I have revised the paper according to your suggestions. The following is a revision of the paper. Suggestion or question 1. Are all the cited references relevant to the research?Response on the revision: We checked all the literature one by one (including the new literature added in this revision), and all of them were relevant to the content of the paper. Suggestion or question 2. Is the article adequately referenced?Response on the revision: In this revision, we have added a lot of literature throughout the paper, especially in Section 2 "Literature Review", which provides a fuller review of relevant studies. See Part 2 and other parts of the paper for details. Suggestion or question 3. Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?Response on the revision: We checked all the literature one by one (including those added in this revision), and all of them support the ideas of this thesis. If there are modifications that are not in place, please propose more modifications. We will definitely revise it seriously. Thanks again for your review!Kind regards Huizhan Wang, Kai Bai, Huimin Wang and Islam Rafiqul October 25th, 2022
Reviewer 2 Report
1. the fundamental problem of the text is the extremely long sentences, sometimes even 10 lines, which make sometimes completely impossible to search for meaning and context;
2. in the conclusion and discussion, the article does not offer concrete interpretations of the results, but the findings are of a general nature and repeat several times;
3. the findings have a strategic context, but three key factors highlighted by other research in the field of poverty are omitted:
- poverty is critically influenced by the education of the population, which is particularly important for rural tourism development, as individuals, families or small businesses wishing to engage in tourism need to understand the importance and values of tourism;
another important factor affecting poverty is the out-migration of the rural population, generally more educated, which reduces the potential for rural tourism development.
- the third key factor is the infrastructure that enables the development of rural tourism.
4. generalisations of the causes and consequences can be found in the conclusion and discussion;
5. considering the speed of China's development in the last 10 years, sources from Chinese authors older than 10 years may be questionable
6. a very modest literature review that does not provide a broader insight into the research findings in the field of poverty and rural tourism.
7. in chapter: 2.2 the motivating mechanism of a precise poverty reduction in rural tourism is defined, which is repeated in the conclusion as a basic finding
Author Response
Dear reviewer We are the authors of the paper (Manuscript ID: sustainability-1952006). Thank you very much for your review of the paper, your suggestions helped a lot in revising the paper. I have revised the paper according to your suggestions. The following is a revision of the paper. Suggestion or question 1. The fundamental problem of the text is the extremely long sentences, sometimes even 10 lines, which make sometimes completely impossible to search for meaning and context.Response on the revision：On the one hand, we revised the long sentences as much as possible; On the other hand, we submitted the paper to MDPI for linguistic touch-ups according to the editorial recommendation; The record of touch-ups is shown in the paper, and the proof of touch-ups is attached. However, it needs to be explained that there are still some long sentences that are not very easy to compress. Suggestion or question 2. In the conclusion and discussion, the article does not offer concrete interpretations of the results, but the findings are of a general nature and repeat several times.Response on the revision: Thanks to your very pertinent suggestions, we have made focused changes to the conclusion and discussion sections. In the Discussion section, the theoretical contributions of the paper have been added. See Section 5 "Discussion" and Section 6 "Conclusion and Policy Implications" for details. Suggestion or question 3. The findings have a strategic context, but three key factors highlighted by other research in the field of poverty are omitted:
- poverty is critically influenced by the education of the population, which is particularly important for rural tourism development, as individuals, families or small businesses wishing to engage in tourism need to understand the importance and values of tourism;
- another important factor affecting poverty is the out-migration of the rural population, generally more educated, which reduces the potential for rural tourism development.
- the third key factor is the infrastructure that enables the development of rural tourism.Response on the revision: Regarding these three key factors, we have added them in lines 253 to 266 in the section "2.2 The power source of precise poverty alleviation in rural tourism".The specific modifications are as follows:The role of poor people in tourism precise poverty alleviation is affected by many factors, among which the lack of capital restricts the depth and breadth of poor people's participation in tourism precise poverty alleviation; In particular, the lack of social capital reduces the ability of poor residents to participate in tourism poverty alleviation. The lack of physical capital (mainly capital and infrastructure) restricts the development of rural tourism, which in turn reduces the opportunities for poor residents to participate in tourism poverty alleviation. The lack of human capital reduces the ability of poor residents to participate in tourism poverty alleviation. On the one hand, due to the population siphoning effect of cities and towns, there is an exodus of highly educated residents from poor villages, which means that rural tourism lacks the necessary intellectual support for precise poverty alleviation; On the other hand, as most poor people have a low level of education and weak learning ability, they do not have a deep understanding of rural tourism and lack basic tourism service skills. This seriously affects tourism precise poverty alleviation[57].（Reference: 57. Zhu, B.L.; Liu,X.Y. The construction of endogenous mechanism of tourism poverty alleviation in ethnic areas: A case study of Bash Miao ethnic village in southeast Guizhou province. Ecological Economy.2018,9,139-144.) Suggestion or question 4. Generalisations of the causes and consequences can be found in the conclusion and discussion.Response on the revision: Thank you for your very pertinent suggestions. We have revised the conclusion and discussion section, and explained the conditions of application and the role of the model of the poverty alleviation mechanism of rural tourism. For details, please refer to Section 5 "Discussion" and Section 6 "Conclusion and Policy Implications" of the paper. Suggestion or question 5. Considering the speed of China's development in the last 10 years, sources from Chinese authors older than 10 years may be questionable.Response on the revision: As you said, China has changed a lot in this decade, and some of the literature from ten years ago is indeed a bit outdated. According to your suggestion, we have added many papers from the last decade. However, we have not deleted some of the older Chinese literature, among them, literature 66 is mainly borrowed from the viewpoint of "tourism poverty alleviation is a system project", literature 67 is a classic literature in the field of tourism poverty alleviation research in China, literature 70, 71, 72 is about (tourism) empowerment, and literature 73 is about research methodology. The literature on (tourism) empowerment, and the literature on research methodology. Suggestion or question 6. Avery modest literature review that does not provide a broader insight into the research findings in the field of poverty and rural tourism.Response on the revision: In this revision, we have added a lot of literature throughout the paper, especially in Section 2"Literature Review," which provides a fuller review of relevant studies. See Section 2 and other parts of the paper for details. Suggestion or question 7. In chapter: 2.2 the motivating mechanism of a precise poverty reduction in rural tourism is defined, which is repeated in the conclusion as a basic finding.Response on the revision: We have substantially revised Section 2 "Literature Review," and Section 5"Discussion," of the paper, and we have eliminated as much repetition as possible. Suggestion or question 8. Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?Response on the revision: We have revised the introduction extensively and added more relevant theoretical and practical background, see Section 1 "Introduction". Suggestion or question 9. Are all the cited references relevant to the research?Response on the revision: We checked all the literature one by one (including the new literature added in this revision), and all of them were relevant to the content of the paper. Suggestion or question 10. Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?Response on the revision: We have fine-tuned the above problem in Section 3 “The construction of the model of motivation mechanism of precise poverty alleviation in rural tourism ”and Section 4 “The improvement of the model of motivation mechanism of precise poverty alleviation in rural tourism ”of the paper as appropriate. Suggestion or question 11. Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?Response on the revision: The above revisions are mainly in Section 1 "Introduction", Section 2 "Literature Review" and Section 5 "Discussion" of the paper. Suggestion or question 12. For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?Response on the revision: We have revised the Conclusion and Discussion sections. See Section 5 "Discussion" and Section 6 "Conclusion and Policy Implications" for details. Suggestion or question 13. Is the article adequately referenced?Response on the revision: In this revision, we have added a lot of literature throughout the paper, especially in Section 2 "Literature Review", which provides a fuller review of relevant studies. See Part 2 and other parts of the paper for details. Suggestion or question 14. Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?Response on the revision: We checked all the literature one by one (including those added in this revision), and all of them support the ideas of this thesis. If there are modifications that are not in place, please propose more modifications. We will definitely revise it seriously. Thanks again for your review!Kind regards Huizhan Wang, Kai Bai, Huimin Wang and Islam Rafiqul October 25th, 2022
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
you have done a great job with the corrections you have made to the paper. You have taken into account all the proposals and comments and the paper is much more consistent and comprehensive in content. I have only 2 additional proposals:
1. probably the problem lies in my understanding of sentence structure in Chinese, but long multi-paragraph sentences are still difficult to understand, especially for all readers who are not fluent in English
2. In the discussion, I miss the comparison of some findings and positions with the findings of other authors
Author Response
Suggestion 1. Please check that all references are relevant to the contents of the manuscript.
Response on the revision: We checked all the literature one by one again(including the new literature added in this revision), and all of them were relevant to the content of the paper.
Suggestion 2. Any revisions to the manuscript should be marked up using the “Track Changes” function if you are using MS Word/LaTeX, such that any changes can be easily viewed by the editors and reviewers.
Response on the revision: We used the "track changes" feature throughout the revision process, and the revision marks can be found in the paper.
Suggestion 3. Please provide a cover letter to explain, point by point, the details of the revisions to the manuscript and your responses to the referees’ comments.
Response on the revision: We have revised and responded to the comments of the second reviewer item by item, see cover letter.
Suggestion 4. If you found it impossible to address certain comments in the review reports, please include an explanation in your appeal.
Response on the revision: We made changes to most of the suggestions, and a small number of unchanged areas were explained to the reviewer.
Suggestion 5. The revised version will be sent to the editors and reviewers.
Response on the revision: We uploaded the revisions via email.
Suggestion 6. If one of the referees has suggested that your manuscript should undergo extensive English revisions, please address this issue during revision. We propose that you use one of the editing services listed at https://www.mdpi.com/authors/english or have your manuscript checked by a native English-speaking colleague.
