This paper has a clear title as well the abstract was written with very high standard.

The submitted manuscript focused on scrutinizing the role of institutional quality on tourist flow incorporating the role of distance and socio-economic factors. In doing so, author(s) applied Poisson Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood estimator approach to analyze panel time series data for 131 origin countries and 34 destinations. The study demonstrates several interesting findings. The key fining of this study is institutional quality promotes tourism flows for both source and destination countries. After going through the paper, my evaluation is mixed The positive side, the issue tackled in this study is interesting and match with the scope of this journal. The study has some original contribution in the literature. In addition, it is easy follow the story of this paper. Nevertheless I think there are many rooms to improve the paper before publication 1. Motivation and contribution of this study should be highlighted very clearly

1. Literature should be enriched with recent studies. It should be focused how institution may influences tourist flows

2. The data table should be given highlighting short form, definition, and source

3. Author applied Principal Components Analysis (PCA) applied to generate index of institutional quality out of 12 factors. The rationality should be spelled out

4. Author(s) demonstrated that Common border, currency and language exert a positive influence on tourist inflow, while the common colonizer is detrimental to the flow of tourists. It should be explained in detailed by providing the evidences

5. Discussion is very brief, mainly interpretation. Therefore, it should be improved based on the existing literature

6. Policy implication should be added in line with the findings of this study

The submitted manuscript focused on scrutinizing the role of institutional quality on tourist flow incorporating the role of distance and socio-economic factors. In doing so, author(s) applied Poisson Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood estimator approach to analyze panel time series data for 131 origin countries and 34 destinations. The study demonstrates several interesting findings. The key fining of this study is institutional quality promotes tourism flows for both source and destination countries. After going through the paper, my evaluation is mixed The positive side, the issue tackled in this study is interesting and match with the scope of this journal. The study has some original contribution in the literature. In addition, it is easy follow the story of this paper. Nevertheless I think there are many rooms to improve the paper before publication 1. Motivation and contribution of this study should be highlighted very clearly

1. Literature should be enriched with recent studies. It should be focused how institution may influences tourist flows

2. The data table should be given highlighting short form, definition, and source

3. Author applied Principal Components Analysis (PCA) applied to generate index of institutional quality out of 12 factors. The rationality should be spelled out

4. Author(s) demonstrated that Common border, currency and language exert a positive influence on tourist inflow, while the common colonizer is detrimental to the flow of tourists. It should be explained in detailed by providing the evidences

5. Discussion is very brief, mainly interpretation. Therefore, it should be improved based on the existing literature

6. Policy implication should be added in line with the findings of this study

The submitted manuscript focused on scrutinizing the role of institutional quality on tourist flow incorporating the role of distance and socio-economic factors. In doing so, author(s) applied Poisson Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood estimator approach to analyze panel time series data for 131 origin countries and 34 destinations. The study demonstrates several interesting findings. The key fining of this study is institutional quality promotes tourism flows for both source and destination countries. After going through the paper, my evaluation is mixed The positive side, the issue tackled in this study is interesting and match with the scope of this journal. The study has some original contribution in the literature. In addition, it is easy follow the story of this paper. Nevertheless I think there are many rooms to improve the paper before publication 1. Motivation and contribution of this study should be highlighted very clearly

1. Literature should be enriched with recent studies. It should be focused how institution may influences tourist flows

2. The data table should be given highlighting short form, definition, and source

3. Author applied Principal Components Analysis (PCA) applied to generate index of institutional quality out of 12 factors. The rationality should be spelled out

4. Author(s) demonstrated that Common border, currency and language exert a positive influence on tourist inflow, while the common colonizer is detrimental to the flow of tourists. It should be explained in detailed by providing the evidences

5. Discussion is very brief, mainly interpretation. Therefore, it should be improved based on the existing literature

6. Policy implication should be added in line with the findings of this study

The submitted manuscript focused on scrutinizing the role of institutional quality on tourist flow incorporating the role of distance and socio-economic factors. In doing so, author(s) applied Poisson Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood estimator approach to analyze panel time series data for 131 origin countries and 34 destinations. The study demonstrates several interesting findings. The key fining of this study is institutional quality promotes tourism flows for both source and destination countries. After going through the paper, my evaluation is mixed The positive side, the issue tackled in this study is interesting and match with the scope of this journal. The study has some original contribution in the literature. In addition, it is easy follow the story of this paper. Nevertheless I think there are many rooms to improve the paper before publication 1. Motivation and contribution of this study should be highlighted very clearly

1. Literature should be enriched with recent studies. It should be focused how institution may influences tourist flows

2. The data table should be given highlighting short form, definition, and source

3. Author applied Principal Components Analysis (PCA) applied to generate index of institutional quality out of 12 factors. The rationality should be spelled out

4. Author(s) demonstrated that Common border, currency and language exert a positive influence on tourist inflow, while the common colonizer is detrimental to the flow of tourists. It should be explained in detailed by providing the evidences

5. Discussion is very brief, mainly interpretation. Therefore, it should be improved based on the existing literature

6. Policy implication should be added in line with the findings of this study