Food and Nutrient Supply from Organic Agriculture in the Least Developed Countries and North America

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I am currently fine with the current version of the paper. Authors correctly addressed my comments in revising the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your kind comment. We have reviewed the manuscript once again to avoid any mistake in English language style as far as possible.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is interesting. However I have big concern about its methodological correctness. First, the authors attempted to use something like metanalysis when it comes to yields rate. Then, they estimated organic food production (OFP) and organic food supply (OFS) as linear functions of the yields rate. In neither case does the analysis have a theoretical basis; moreover, it has not been sufficiently advocated by literature. The basic question is why would OFP be a linear function of actual food production ? Similarly, the values estimated in equation 2, again as a linear function, may contradict basic economic intuition. Thus, the assumptions adopted by the authors are quite unrealistic, and poorly advocated. For example, do the authors believe that indeed organic food supply in LDCs might exceed the current food supply, as implied by the estimated value ?  I would therefore suggest that the studies should be better grounded methodologically by going in the direction of a real meta-analysis. It is not clear what Figures 1-2 and Tables 2-7 refer to ? Is it about organic food or conventional food ? Finally, I agree with the conclusions presented by the authors. However, I have doubts whether they really stem from the analysis?

Author Response

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. Please find the attachment for our response.

Sincerely yours

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

After the review, the article works. Good job.

Author Response

Thank you so much for your kind comment and such a wonderful compliment.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors haven't addressed my doubts and the paper hasn't been  improved.