Interrelations between Income Inequality and Sustainable Economic Growth: Contradictions of Empirical Research and New Results
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the article "Interrelations between income inequality and sustainable economic growth: contradictions of empirical research and new results", the authors focused on the relationship between income inequality and economic growth. In the abstract, they mention the use of data from 21 empirical studies, which are not explicitly mentioned in the methodology. In the literature review, the authors classify 19 studies according to the relationship between economic growth, innovation and economic inequality. At the same time, comparing the results of studies and compiling the results of the WID and World Bank databases can, in my view, find it difficult to give a simple answer to the complexity of the relationship between income inequality and economic growth. The authors use the term income inequality in the title and abstract and the term economic inequality in hypotheses. They only focused on the Gini index to compare income inequality, not to mention its limitations and disadvantages. A significant shortcoming of the work is the absence of a quality scientific discussion. Despite the title of the chapter Discussion, in this there is practically no comparison of the achieved results with the results of other authors.
In this form, due to the seriousness of the claims, I do not recommend the submitted work for publication in the scientific journal Economies.
Author Response
Dear Sir/Madam
Thank you for you review. You can find our answers in the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is difficult to follow. There are no basic information in the abstrac such as methodology, research gap, original solution and novelty of the study. The methodology is not clear for me, why not a meta analysis ? why correlation ? please provide examples of related works based on correlation? Figure 1 is imcompleate where is ordoliberalism and others ? Conclusion part must be revised, whatis the limitation of the study and future work ? There are no research questions in the intro, the hypotesis should also be presented in this section. Whats about info about papers' sections ? Pleae justify the methodlogy and summarise the research results based on related work in the table.
Author Response
Dear Sir/Madam
Thank you for you review. You can find our answers in the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article “Interrelations between income inequality and sustainable economic growth: contradictions of empirical research and new results” is relevant. The results in article of 21 empirical studies on the relationship between economic inequality and economic growth analyzed in this article are interesting and relevant. However, I would recommend covering 2020 in empirical studies.
Author Response
Dear Sir/Madam
Thank you for you review. You can find our answers in the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author (s) supplemented the paper to a sufficient extent. As for the technical details, I propose to unify the number of studies (21 are mentioned in the text, 22 sources are calculated in the updated version). The title of the amended Table 1 still contains the terms economic inequality and economic growth, while in the texts of Table 1 the income inequality is mentioned. The text does not include alternative methodologies of comparison and disadvantages of the Gini index. After incorporating minor corrections, I consider the article suitable for acceptance for publication in the journal Economies.
Author Response
Dear Mr/Ms Reviewer
Thank you for you work. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Please justify research problem more clear and indicate original research solution. Why the methodology you used is the most suitable to the research problem you tackle ? Please extend literature review
Author Response
Dear Mr/Ms Reviewer
Thank you for your work. Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
no suggestions
