Comparative Study on National Policies and Educational Approaches toward Regional Revitalization in Japan and South Korea: Aiming to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The analyzed topic is very interesting and up to date in many contexts, e.g.: social, demographic, economic, administrative, spatial.

The correct terminology was used. The language of the paper is correct, adequate.

The title is adequate to the research problem being undertaken. The article has been correctly divided into relevant sections, and their content coincides with their titles.

 

The Introduction part is well prepared.

The purpose (aim) of the paper is not really clear. Please, correct it. It would also be good to refer to the aim of the paper in the final conclusions.

No hypothesis was given. Please, complete the paper with hypothesis.

 

The cited literature is on the subject. Also, the volume of the References part does not raise any objections. The literature review shows that the majority of references are current.

 

The methodological part is very well described.

 

Footnotes and bibliography are in my opinion correctly formulated.

 

The conducted research provides grounds for interesting conclusions

 The technical part of the article does not raise any objections. The work is aesthetic. 

In my opinion, the last part of the paper could be extended. 

Author Response

Response to reviewer 1

 

Dear Reviewer

                   We would like to express our appreciation for your careful reading and invaluable comments. Your comments are highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. In the following pages are our point-by-point responses to each of the comments from you.

 

Comments and Response

【Your Comments】

The analyzed topic is very interesting and up to date in many contexts, e.g.: social, demographic, economic, administrative, spatial.

The correct terminology was used. The language of the paper is correct, adequate.

The title is adequate to the research problem being undertaken. The article has been correctly divided into relevant sections, and their content coincides with their titles.

The Introduction part is well prepared.

 

The purpose (aim) of the paper is not really clear. Please, correct it. It would also be good to refer to the aim of the paper in the final conclusions.

 

No hypothesis was given. Please, complete the paper with hypothesis.

 

The cited literature is on the subject. Also, the volume of the References part does not raise any objections. The literature review shows that the majority of references are current.

The methodological part is very well described.

Footnotes and bibliography are in my opinion correctly formulated.

 

The conducted research provides grounds for interesting conclusions.

The technical part of the article does not raise any objections. The work is aesthetic.

In my opinion, the last part of the paper could be extended.

 

【Response】

First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedules to review my paper.

We also appreciate your valuable comments.

Your feedback referred to the points that I had paid attention to in my paper, and I realized that you had read it carefully.

 

I've also highlighted the pieces of advice you gave me in the comments.

 

I also specified the purpose of the research and the hypotheses to be tested.

(line 46～line 50, and line 440～line 448)

 

Your advice is very important, and I think it is necessary information to make the research content easier to understand for readers. Thanks to your comment, I also realized that setting hypotheses emphasizes the purpose of the research.

 

I was able to learn from your comments how I should express my results as I proceed with my research.

I will do my best in future research based on your feedback and other comments.

 

Also, just to be sure, this manuscript was edited into grammatically correct English through the English editing service after revisions.

 

We’d like to thank you again for your valuable comments, your comments and suggestions have improved our paper!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In this article, the authors propose a comparative analysis of the trends and characteristics of national policies and educational approaches to problem solving in Japan and South Korea through a literature review.

- The theme is certainly original and addresses a gap in the field of research by providing a comparative analysis of educational policies and approaches for regional revitalization in Japan and South Korea.

- Methodologically, the article is articulated as a review and is well-oriented, as it offers an exhaustive analysis of the existing literature on the topic discussed. It also provides a critical and constructive approach and provides recommendations for future research.

- The conclusions are consistent and address the main question posed. The study shows that policies and education are closely related to regional revitalization, and it was found that Japan aims to increase the permanent population of youth by creating attractive regions in each region and South Korea aims to alleviate the shortage of labor caused by population decline through labor immigration and aspires to regional revitalization through comprehensive cooperation between its own citizens, immigrants and people with multiple cultures.

-References are appropriate

Congratulations

Author Response

Response to reviewer 2

 

Dear Reviewer

                   We would like to express our appreciation for your careful reading and invaluable comments. Your comments are highly insightful and enabled us to greatly improve the quality of our manuscript. In the following are responses to the comments from you.

 

Comments and Responce

In this article, the authors propose a comparative analysis of the trends and characteristics of national policies and educational approaches to problem solving in Japan and South Korea through a literature review.

- The theme is certainly original and addresses a gap in the field of research by providing a comparative analysis of educational policies and approaches for regional revitalization in Japan and South Korea.

- Methodologically, the article is articulated as a review and is well-oriented, as it offers an exhaustive analysis of the existing literature on the topic discussed. It also provides a critical and constructive approach and provides recommendations for future research.

- The conclusions are consistent and address the main question posed. The study shows that policies and education are closely related to regional revitalization, and it was found that Japan aims to increase the permanent population of youth by creating attractive regions in each region and South Korea aims to alleviate the shortage of labor caused by population decline through labor immigration and aspires to regional revitalization through comprehensive cooperation between its own citizens, immigrants and people with multiple cultures.

 

-References are appropriate

Congratulations

 

First of all, I would like to thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedules to review my paper.

We also appreciate your valuable comments.

Your feedback referred to the points that I had paid attention to in my paper, and I realized that you had read it carefully.

I will do my best in future research based on your feedback and other comments.

 

Also, just to be sure, this manuscript was edited into grammatically correct English through the English editing service after revisions.

 

Once again, thank you very much.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf