Developing and Enhancing the Competitiveness of the Palestinian National Product: The Leather and Footwear Sector—Analysis and Evaluation of Government Interventions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The abstract has not explained the total sample and population as well as the research period.
In the abstract and introduction, Novelty manuscripts have not been explained in detail.
In the introduction there is no explanation about the phenomenon of GAP or Research GAP, it is necessary to add the phenomenon of GAP and research GAP.
The Review of the Literature should explain the underlying grand theory, the theory is used to strengthen the argument for developing hypotheses.
In the method, it is better to display the data during the observation period.
The research shown is old data and is neither updated nor relevant to research conducted in 2022.
Table 1 should explain the SWOT analysis, namely Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.
In figure 1. it is better not only until 2016 but until 2021 and Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4. It is also advisable not only until 2021, not only until 2017 because the data is too old. So it is irrelevant if the analysis and discussion is explained or used in 2022.
References are not updated, the manuscript does not use the latest references so it is not necessarily relevant anymore and is not in alphabetical order.
References should be dominated by the last 5 years.
In the conclusion section, it is necessary to explain the research implications that can be generalized to the international community.
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the comments and kind suggestions.
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper seeks to consider the efficient use of boosting customs tariffs by the Palestinian government to support the ratio of the share market of the leather and shoe sector. The study depends on testing the change of importing shoes from China that forms the main income as an indicator to achieve the aim. The case study is based on data imported from the West Bank.
- I recommend adding some schema to present the proposed framework ( Preprocessing of data - Correlation -... )
- Conduct a feature selection technique to choose to most relevant features.
- The study should be extended to recent years to cover the impact of COVID-19
- For the regression model, it's recommended to use a robust techniques such as Artificial Neural Network
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the comments and kind suggestions.
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Developing and enhancing the competitiveness of the Palestinian national product and increasing its market share: the leather and footwear sector - analysis and evaluation of government interventions
The abstract should state briefly the purpose of the research, the principal results and major conclusions. An abstract is often presented separately from the article, so it must be able to stand alone.
l I would suggest the author to shorten the tile. What has been studied Introduction should be clearly stated research questions and targets first. Then answer several questions: Why is the topic important (or why do you study on it)? What are research questions or objectives? What are your contributions? Why is to propose this particular method (This must come from Literature discussion)?
l To be legible, the whole text must be completely edited with the help of a native English editor to polish your writing
l The contribution is not well-positioned as compared to the existing literature. First, the scope of the literature review is not clear. Second, the contribution as compared to the existing literature is not well stated. What is really new in the research?
l The literature review is necessary for you to clarify the “contribution” of your study. In current form, there is none literatures to support your study.
l Why do you propose linear regression ?　In current version, this literature is not well posit the gaps or discuss those theme in your study.
l What are the purpose of those figures ?　
Author Response
We would like to thank the Reviewer for the comments and kind suggestions.
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The research period is 2010-2021, some are still being written until 2022. For example in lines 14, 319, 485, 723 and others such as abstract period 2010-2022, Figure 3 and others. Please adjust.
Each Table and Figure added its source as Table 1.
Preferably the reference used in the last 5 years or, a maximum of the last 10 years.
Author Response
The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for his worthy comments because they will make the manuscript valuable.
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
- What has been studied Introduction should be clearly stated research questions and targets first. Then answer several questions: Why is the topic important (or why do you study on it)? What are research four questions or objectives? What are your contributions? Why is to propose this particular method (This must come from Literature discussion)? This study should address why this “Difference in Difference” is important to your study and how to develop and enhance the competitiveness of the Palestinian national product: the leather and footwear sector
- The literature review is necessary for you to clarify the “contribution” of your study. Please underscore the scientific value added/contributions of your paper in your abstract and introduction and address your debate shortly in the abstract. For instance, (2022) Investigating strategies of a green closed-loop supply chain for substitutable products under government subsidy, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 39:4, 253-27. This article is related to your study. Please discuss it in your context and references section.
- (2021) Sustainable industrial and operation engineering trends and challenges Toward Industry 4.0: a data driven analysis, Journal of Industrial and Production Engineering, 38:8, 581-598
- The result section is fine for me. But, the author needs to proper discuss each table before your table head.
- I would suggest the discussion and result separate into 2 sections
- Your conclusions' section needs to underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your findings/results, as indicated previously. Basically, you should enhance your findings, limitations, underscore the scientific value added of your paper, and/or the applicability of your contributions/shortages and future study in this session.
- The literature review should be discussed more.
Author Response
The authors would like to thank the Reviewer for his worthy comments because they will make the manuscript valuable.
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
accepted
