Will COVID-19 Boost Sustainable Tourism: Wishful Thinking or Reality?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read the paper "Will COVID-19 Boost Sustainable Tourism: Wishful Thinking or Reality?".

Overall, the paper is very well organized, structured and written.

I do not have any comments on this manuscript.

Good luck!

Author Response

Thank you very much for doing the review and the positive feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors, your statement "These countries were selected to cover different cultural identities" is not clear in methodology part. Please, explain some more details about the mostly important similarities and related differences.  How you decide that Norway and Finland covering different cultural identities? This topic from your article is very important for the green tourism reload activities. Sincerely, Reviewer.

1.  Dear Authors, please explain why only selected countries are important for yours research related to sustainable tourism?

2. Please add more details about yours methodology connected with the sentence "These countries were selected to cover different cultural identities".

3. Why Finland and Norway are different in cultural identities?

Author Response

Thank you very much for doing the review and your useful feedback. We revised the methodology section and added a more comprehensive explanation of the research approach as well as a more detailed explanation concerning the countries we included in our study (end of page 6 / beginning of page 7). By this we hope to cover the three comments made in your review.

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic is interesting and the study presents curious results, but I think it lacks some clarity in defining the objectives of this work. Thus, I present some aspects that should deserve attention from the authors:

• In the introduction, they should clearly state the purpose of this investigation.
• At the end of the literature review, they should clearly state what the research questions are.
• In terms of methodology, it is important to better explain the construction of the questionnaire, justifying the theoretical and/or exploratory basis that allowed it to be constructed. It is important to notice if there were adaptations in the questionnaires used. Were items added or deleted? On the other hand, they do not address anything about the internal consistency of the questionnaire.
• 13 - line 435 - Why did you choose to measure the social values using Schwartz's scale? And what is the relevance of this analysis? (I think this issue must be justified in the theoretical framework, and in consistency with the research objectives).
• I think that the conclusions of this article do not clearly clarify the practical implications of the study, as well as they do not clearly present how this article contributes to the advancement of the "state of the art".

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review our paper and the very useful remarks for our revision.

Please find attached a file listing how we considered your remarks in the revised version of our paper.

Thanks again.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors made the suggested changes. In my opinion, the article meets the conditions to be publishable.