Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In paragraph of lines 168-176 you set up 3(-4) categories: agricultural activity, livestock and both activities. However, I do not understand why livestock production is not included to agricultural activity.

The whole text and especially chapter 3 is too fragmented, e.g.: 3.1.1 sub-chapter consists of only 4 lines.

Direct references are not well referred, e.g.: in line 81, line 114 etc. Here the name(s) and  year should also be displayed.

The role of "non-commercialized" products is unclear. You have mentioned this category several times but what happens with them at the end of the day? Are they simply left on the field?

What is the role of self consumed products in your BAP ratio?

In your text you suggest that the number of intermediaries should be kept as low as possible. On the contrary, the solution of the problemm you suggest is to set up a new intermediary (CCBAP). This contradiction should be solved in the paper.

Your discussion is rather a second literature review where your findings are not really discussed. This should be changed.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Esteemed Authors,

 

I am hereby writing my feedback on the scientific paper entitled ”Backyard-Agricultural Production as Strategy for Local Economy Strengthening. Case Chontla and Tempoal, México”.

The research is of medium value due to its novel character: it treats an interesting and specific subject that is of special interest for the public authorities responsible for the organization and the development of agriculture, for the specialists in the sustainable development of agriculture, for the specialists in the food trade and for the consumers.

This type of production - backyard agricultural production - it is very important for many of the states of the world, especially for those in the category of low-income countries and the category of upper-middle-income countries.

The solving some problems like as sustainable development of agriculture for the rural communities and the development of the supply chain remains an important target for the official authorities in all countries, regardless of their degree of development (with very small exceptions). This problem is all the more important in the case of vegetable products, which are extremely important for the development of the local economy and for ensuring food security.

The essential objective of the research is well defined and pursued. With some minor exceptions, the materials and methods are specified and described adequately, following the model of a classical work: Introduction; Materials and Methods; Results; Discussion, and Conclusions. The paper contains iconographic materials – 2 figures and 3 tables, which are well presented and interpreted.

However, following a thorough analysis, several aspects requiring improvement have been revealed as follows:

The bibliography is generous and relevant for the topics of article, but the formatting is not homogeneous and clear: I would also suggest that the authors write the bibliography in a uniform manner: for example, journal papers require either the complete journal name, or the JCR abbreviation (in the case of ISI indexed or rated journals), or the ISO abbreviation (for BDI indexed journals); moreover, for journals, I suggest that the volume, number, and pages (as the case requires) be mentioned. The mention of the pages and or other identifying elements (link, Digital Object Identifier – DOI, Webb address – Uniform Resource Locator – URL, etc.) is also necessary for other types of bibliographic sources - books, volumes of scientific manifestations, proceedings, reports, etc.

            These clarifications are necessary to avoid confusion created by relatively similar names of some journals and for easier reading of the work by the readers.

            Supplementary, I would advise the authors to be more careful with regard to the bibliography: it is preferred that the cited authors be mentioned in alphabetical order, and references without specified authors be mentioned at the end of the list of references, in chronological order. I also recommend using a single system not only in citations but also when it comes to the journals. I am referring here mainly to mentioning the following elements for each article consulted: journal, volume, issue and pages (the DOI may also be mentioned, should the author so desire, but the basic descriptive elements are the previously mentioned ones).

For example: page 12, lines 455-456, number 16 in the bibliographic references list: Minten B., Randrianarison L., Swinnen J.F.M. (2009). Global Retail Chains and Poor Farmers: Evidence from Madagascar. World Development (or JCR Abbreviation – World Dev.), 37, 11, 1728-1741; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.024.

Another example: page 12, lines 488-489, number 30 in the bibliographic references list: Zúñiga-Arias G., Ruben R., van Boekel M. (2009). Managing quality heterogeneity in the mango supply chain: evidence from Costa Rica. Trends in Food Science & Technology (or JCR Abbreviation – Trends Food Sci. Tech.), 20, 3-4, 168-179; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2009.01.059.

Under these circumstances, the additional mention of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) becomes optional.

The observation is valid for all the articles from the bibliographic references list that are incompletely formulated.

Moreover, I suggest the consultation and the inclusion in the list of bibliographic references of the following works:

Bondoc I., 2016. European Regulation in the Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Area, a Component of the European Policies on the Safety of Food Products and the Protection of Consumer Interests: A 2007 Retrospective. Part One: the Role of European Institutions in Laying Down and Passing Laws Specific to the Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Area. Universul Juridic, Supliment, 12-15 (Available online: http://revista.universuljuridic.ro/supliment/european-regulation-veterinary-sanitary-food-safety-area-component-european-policies-safety-food-products-protection-consumer-interests-2007-retrospective/).

Bondoc I., 2016. European Regulation in the Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Area, a Component of the European Policies on the Safety of Food Products and the Protection of Consumer Interests: A 2007 Retrospective. Part Two: Regulations. Universul Juridic, Supliment, 16-19 (Available online: http://revista.universuljuridic.ro/supliment/european-regulation-veterinary-sanitary-food-safety-area-component-european-policies-safety-food-products-protection-consumer-interests-2007-retrospective-2/).

Bondoc I., 2016. European Regulation in the Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Area, a Component of the European Policies on the Safety of Food Products and the Protection of Consumer Interests: A 2007 Retrospective. Part Three: Directives. Universul Juridic, Supliment, 20-23 (Available online: http://revista.universuljuridic.ro/supliment/european-regulation-veterinary-sanitary-food-safety-area-component-european-policies-safety-food-products-protection-consumer-interests-2007-retrospective-part/).

Bondoc I., 2016. European Regulation in the Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Area, a Component of the European Policies on the Safety of Food Products and the Protection of Consumer Interests: A 2007 Retrospective. Part Four: Decisions. Universul Juridic, Supliment, 24-27 (Available online: http://revista.universuljuridic.ro/supliment/european-regulation-veterinary-sanitary-food-safety-area-component-european-policies-safety-food-products-protection-consumer-interests-2007-retrospective-part-2/).

All these papers approach the matter of food safety legislation enforced within the European Union, which usually constitutes a blueprint for the legislation in third countries. The 4 papers outline the European legislative environment, starting with the year 2007, the year of the penultimate geo-political enlargement of the European Union. I would like to add that all 4 recommended papers have been indexed in CAB International and HeinOnline, the largest and most important worldwide database for papers in the legal field.

Additionally, I recommend adding one book to the bibliographic references list, respectively:

Bondoc I. (2015). Foundations of Veterinary Sanitary and Food Safety Legislation (Bazele legislației sanitar-veterinare și pentru siguranța alimentelor – Original Title). Vol. I. ”Ion Ionescu de la Brad” Iași Publishing, ISBN 978-973-147-162-4.

This book has been indexed in Web of Science Core Collection, the largest and most important worldwide database for papers in the food science and technology field (Available online at: https://apps.webofknowledge.com/summary.do?product=WOS&parentProduct=WOS&search_mode=GeneralSearch&parentQid=&qid=1&SID=D4mmWNNSwrkZNOK81mn&&update_back2search_link_param=yes&page=2).

            I recommend more attention regarding the authors' reference to the bibliography: for each author the name (family name) must be mentioned, followed by the first name/forename. In the case of men, the forename is abbreviated; in the case of women, the first name/forename is written in full.

Overall, the bibliography of the paper is generous but some important mentions such as the name of the authors and the identifying elements of the article are missing (see previous suggestions and examples).

The documentation is adequate and all the authors are cited in the text of the paper, which is a strong point (an important positive element) of the work.

Regarding the grammar of the text, the article is generally very well written: only a few suggestions for the grammar of the text can be mentioned, as follows:

Page 1, line 24 - replace ‘’Data was’’ with ‘’Data were’’;

Page 1, line 31 – replace ‘’marketed’’ with ‘’market’’;

Page 2, line 48 – replace ‘’with sales’’ with ‘’with the sales’’;

Page 2, line 79 – replace ‘’of backyard’’ with ‘’of the backyard’’;

Page 3, line 95 – replace ‘’of backyard’’ with ‘’of the backyard’’;

Page 3, line 111 – replace ‘’to integrated’’ with ‘’to integrate’’;

Page 3, line 127 – replace ‘’non-commercialized’’ with ‘’being non-commercialized’’;

Page 6, line 239 – replace ‘’not exist’’ with ‘’does not exist’’;

Page 9, line 330 – replace ‘’must be is’’ with ‘’must be’’;

Page 9, line 334 - replace ‘’convert’’ with ‘’converting’’.

As a general conclusion regarding the grammar, the text does not contains other mistakes that need to be corrected. As for editing (writing), the text should be checked once again carefully.

Provided that the authors revise their paper and improve on the elements mentioned above, the paper may be published in the Sustainability.

 

            Best Regards,

            Reviewer

Reviewer 3 Report

This article presents the characteristics of backyard farm system in two Mexican districts, quantify the backyard production through a sample survey and define one profitability indicator for this kind of system.

This article does not provide a very sophisticated methodology, but interesting elements of knowledge of a type of agriculture not very much studied in literature with empirical evidence. Moreover, it provides some interesting and concrete suggestions to improve the income situation of the poorest farmers in two districts.

The article needs a relevant revision of English and a work of editing by some expert editor and English translator.

There are some sentences which need to be revised to explain more clearly the content, as they are in the present version are unclear:

235-236: "Therefore, a traditional scheme defines commercialization in the supply chain of backyard agricultural products of Chontla and Tempoal, Veracruz-México" 241-242: "Common sense and customer inputs must consider for designing the customer specifications" need of a definition/better explanation of what authors mean for non-commercialised production (is it production not harvested? why? and what is the final destination of this production? does it remain not used and consequently lost?) can authors provide some ideas about the additional income for the farm family/individual farmers provided by sales of backyard production? What is the share of income? the idea of a consolidation centre is positive, but it implies the end of direct relations between producers and final consumers, which the same authors state that are relevant in the context of small areas and personal relations of trust. Pros and cons of the centre should be described better than now.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The Discussion part now is much better developed, however the article has some overall deficiency coming from the selected topic than can not really be solved.