Assessing Bioeconomy Development Opportunities in the Latvian Policy Planning Framework

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

 

The paper is very much focused on the Latvian realities. I miss the reference to other countries (comparative analysis), but as I understand, the purpose of the paper was to show only the method of strategic documents analysis. But in this case the methods shown, i.e. KAA, SLR, Topsis, are commonly used anyway.

In the literature review, the authors do not refer at all to the works of other authors related to the analysis of documents or strategies in the field of bioeconomy or, more broadly, environmental protection.

Table 5 – last column heading refers to “Rating by sector” while it gives the sum for all three sector analyzed and thus not rating by sector (which is given in the previous three columns).

Table 6 should be  presented on one page and divided in two parts.

The references [35] and [37] should not be included in scientific paper as they are TV documents or internet entries and nor reviewed sources or official documents or reports.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I think that article is exploring a very important topic. Results are relevant because it may subsidize public policies related to the sustainability and contribute to the science. I think important to demonstrate profile of the experts, because isn´t clear if they has legitimacy to opinate about theme and should describe when, how long was this process.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf