Principles of Sustainable Agriculture: Defining Standardized Reference Points
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Reject
Author Response
Response 1: The authors were requested to ignore this report for not including any detailed comments regarding our manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Interesting piece of work: (i) the literature review is well done, (ii) there is a lot of potential for further research
Please check the references requirements!
According to my knowledge it shoult be like
Angeon, Valérie, and Bates Samuel. 2015. Reviewing Composite Vulnerability and Resilience Indexes: A
Sustainable Approach and Application. World Development 72: 140–62.
Asheim, Bjorn Terje, Arne Isaksen, Claire Nauwelaers, and Franz Tödtling, eds. 2003. Regional Innovation Policy
for Small & Medium Enterprises. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Bailey, David, and Lisa De Propris. 2014. Recession, recovery and resilience? Regional Studies 48: 1757–60.
doi:10.1080/00343404.2014.967082.
706, 769 and
792
Camargo, B. V, & Justo, A. M. (2013). Tutorial para uso do software de análise textual IRAMUTEQ. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina - Laboratório de Psicologia Social da Comunicação e Cognição. Santa Catarina, Brasil (2013).
Author Response
Response 1: Thank you for your comments and for pointing this out. Most probably due to template formatting rules, references were not respecting referencing requirements and style guidelines. We have checked and corrected the entire section according to the American Psychological Association (APA) 6th edition style (713-823).
Specifically regarding the three references you pointed out (former: 706, 769 and 792; current: 714, 776 and 800) these have been amended as follows:
714
United Nations. (2019). Global Sustainable Development Report 2019: The Future is now – Science for Achieving Sustainable Development. New York: United Nations publications.
776
Hayati, D., Ranjbar, Z., & Kamari, E. (2010). Measuring Agricultural Sustainability. In E. Lichtfouse (Ed.), Biodiversity, Biofuels, Agroforestry and Conservation Agriculture (pp. 73-100). Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9513-8
800
Camargo, B. V, & Justo, A. M. (2013). IRAMUTEQ. Tutorial para uso do software de análise textual IRAMUTEQ. Santa Catarina, Brasil: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
I recommend joining points 4 and 5 in a unique point 4 called "Results and discussion".
Author Response
Response 1: Thank you for your comment. According to your suggestion, point 4 and 5 were combined to create a unique point 4 called “Results and discussion” (319) with two subsections: “Multivariate analysis” (320) and “Universal principles for sustainable agriculture” (434); and four subsubsections explaining each established principle (452; 489; 547; 597). This subdivision was maintained in order to guarantee that the reflection and discussion over obtained results was clear and incisive.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors,
Your article fits the scope of the journal; it is an interesting piece of work, rationally well designed and the conclusions are supported by the data.
Nevertheless, the following points shall be considered prior to publication:
1- English: spelling, grammar, typography and synthax must be revised carefully by a Native English Scientist
2- It is not clear if your conclusions are country-specific or not. Please specify it in the title and in the body text.
3- I suggest you add a part related to "Limitations and Perspectives"
Author Response
Point 1: English: spelling, grammar, typography and syntax must be revised carefully by a Native English Scientist
Response 1: Thank you for your comments. According to your suggestion, the manuscript was carefully revised by a Native English researcher to check spelling, grammar, typography and syntax. Furthermore, another round of editing and proofreading was also done to ensure that the content is clearer, more accurate, and concise.
Figure 1 and Figure 3 were also edited in order to change the decimal format (decimal point). Both Figures will be provided at a sufficiently high resolution.
Point 2: It is not clear if your conclusions are country-specific or not. Please specify it in the title and in the body text.
Response 2: We thank you for this useful suggestion. In the present study, our conclusions are general to the agrarian sector on a global basis (680). In order to make it clear, we have changed the title of point 4.2 to “Universal principles for sustainable agriculture” (434) and specified in the body text of conclusions´ section the global comprehension and systematisation of analysed data (632; 641).
Moreover, when pointing out relevant contributions to knowledge, it was added that this work tackled in a formal and empirical way novel means to better understand and normalise sustainability on a global level (665).
Point 3: I suggest you add a part related to "Limitations and Perspectives"
Response 3: Thank you for this suggestion. A new paragraph was included in the conclusions´ section regarding major limitations and the necessity to consider other cultures and include different perspectives to excel specific challenges associated to research of this nature (684-693).
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
