The CSR paper would benefit from a more clearly defined scope and limitations, explicitly outlining the specific cultural and heritage elements under consideration, such as architecture, local traditions, or historical narratives, and addressing potential constraints such as time constraints, accessibility issues, or difficulties in recruiting specific respondent groups (e.g., industry players).Ethical concerns such as informed consent, confidentiality, and power relations should be addressed to guarantee that the research meets moral standards. A pilot study would help to improve interview questions and data-gathering methods, assuring their relevance and effectiveness.The paper's methodology is debatable, mainly due to its reliance on data from postgraduate (master's) dissertations. It raises questions about whether the dissertation authors provided approval for their work to be analyzed. Additionally, the study’s design is unclear, as it is not evident whether it is cross-sectional or longitudinal. The use of master’s dissertations as a primary data source introduces several weaknesses. The variable quality of dissertations, often written by students with limited research experience, may lead to inconsistencies in data rigor and reliability. Unlike peer-reviewed journal articles, dissertations lack the same level of scrutiny, which could compromise the validity and credibility of the findings.Furthermore, while the niche focus of dissertations can offer detailed insights, it may also limit the study if the research questions or contexts do not align closely with its objectives. Potential biases inherent in student research and the risk of outdated information, particularly in a fast-evolving field like tourism and hospitality, further underscore the limitations of this approach. These issues collectively raise concerns about the robustness and generalizability of the study’s findings.