Understanding Sustenance of Small Farm Holders: A Study of Income Inequality among Farm Households in Indian Punjab
, Manjeet Kaur 1, Randeep Singh 2, Kashish Arora 1, Gurlal Singh 1, Gurleen Kaur 1, Sukhdeep Singh 1, Arshdeep Singh 1 and Dalbeer Singh 3,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors reported the study titled “Understanding Sustenance of Small Farm Holders: A Study of Income Inequality among Farm Households in Indian Punjab”. The study is important from the viewpoint of economics and rural sociology. The study aims to assess the present socio-economic profile and the challenges faced in order to draw a roadmap of development for underprivileged households. Overall, the study is well written and is worthy to be published with the following minor revisions:
Academic Language:
- English language used is reasonable, however, it can be still improved by careful rereading. For example, “Income is unevenly distributed among farm households, with the value of the Gini coefficient being 0.48.” can be simply revised as “Income is unevenly distributed among farm households with Gini coefficient of 0.48.”
Abstract:
- Problem statement and research objectives are clear. However, the research gap isn’t linked to the research objectives.
- Please add more numerical findings of this study.
Introduction:
- Please provide citations wherever needed. For example, “with around 22 percent of residents being undernourished and very high level of global hunger index (30.5).” Similarly, please go through the full document.
- Try to avoid words like we, us, etc. For example, “we removed the outliers to obtain”. Instead, these can be referred to as the study or the findings, etc.
- The authors' survey covered 558 farm households. Is this possible for authors to provide such survey form or data in a supplementary file or appendix?
Results:
- The authors provided 11 tables to support their research findings, which are obviously important and needed. However, there is no figure in the paper. I feel it is quite easy to develop 2-3 figures in this paper. If these are not quantitative results figures, then at least that could be qualitative figures to help the readers to understand the research findings graphically.
Discussion:
- Although the authors did good work in the discussion to cross-discuss their results, however, the discussion can be further improved with the inclusion of the updated studies in the field available in the literature.
Recommendations and conclusions are good.
Finally, I wish the best of luck to the authors for their good work.
Author Response
The authors reported the study titled “Understanding Sustenance of Small Farm Holders: A Study of Income Inequality among Farm Households in Indian Punjab”. The study is important from the viewpoint of economics and rural sociology. The study aims to assess the present socio-economic profile and the challenges faced in order to draw a roadmap of development for underprivileged households. Overall, the study is well written and is worthy to be published with the following minor revisions:
Academic Language:
Reviewer comment 1- English language used is reasonable, however, it can be still improved by careful rereading. For example, “Income is unevenly distributed among farm households, with the value of the Gini coefficient being 0.48.” can be simply revised as “Income is unevenly distributed among farm households with Gini coefficient of 0.48.”
Response to reviewer comment 1: The changes are incorporated in light of the comment.
Abstract:
Reviewer comment 2- Problem statement and research objectives are clear. However, the research gap isn’t linked to the research objectives.
Response to reviewer comment 2: The research gap for the study has been incorporated in the abstract and text at suitable places.
Reviewer comment 3- Please add more numerical findings of this study.
Response to reviewer comment 3: The numerical findings of the study have been incorporated in the abstract at suitable places.
Introduction:
Reviewer comment 4- Please provide citations wherever needed. For example, “with around 22 percent of residents being undernourished and very high level of global hunger index (30.5).” Similarly, please go through the full document.
Response to reviewer comment 4: Thank you for highlighting. The citation has been added.
Reviewer comment 5- Try to avoid words like we, us, etc. For example, “we removed the outliers to obtain”. Instead, these can be referred to as the study or the findings, etc.
Response to reviewer comment 5: Thank you. These words have been replaced with other suitable text.
Reviewer comment 6- The authors' survey covered 558 farm households. Is this possible for authors to provide such survey form or data in a supplementary file or appendix?
Response to reviewer comment 6: The study is based on NSSO data. It is publicly available data-set to be freely downloaded at http://microdata.gov.in/nada43/index.php/catalog/133
Results:
Reviewer comment 7- The authors provided 11 tables to support their research findings, which are obviously important and needed. However, there is no figure in the paper. I feel it is quite easy to develop 2-3 figures in this paper. If these are not quantitative results figures, then at least that could be qualitative figures to help the readers to understand the research findings graphically.
Response to reviewer comment 7: As per suggestion by the reviewer, figure has been added at suitable place.
Discussion:
Reviewer comment 8- Although the authors did good work in the discussion to cross-discuss their results, however, the discussion can be further improved with the inclusion of the updated studies in the field available in the literature.
Recommendations and conclusions are good.
Response to reviewer comment 8. Thankyou. The updated relevant review has been incorporated in the discussion.
Finally, I wish the best of luck to the authors for their good work.
Response: Authors thanks the reviewer for your valuable suggestion.
Reviewer 2 Report
The MS titled "Understanding Sustenance of Small Farm Holders: A Study of Income Inequality among Farm Households in Indian Punjab" submitted to MDPI's Sustainability Journal is very interesting, and the authors did a commendable job. The interpretation for inequality among farm households in the Small farmer category is done correctly and well. The authors chose a farmer-dominated state in India for this study, and the data will be extremely useful in understanding farmer needs. The main strength of the manuscript is the review of literature gathered from recent findings or newly references, as well as the methodology used afterwards.
# as stated in manuscript that the sustainability of marginal and small farm households is an important issue in South Asia, as their numbers are regularly increasing. The main aim of this study is to assess their current socioeconomic profile and the challenges they face in order to create a development roadmap for underprivileged households.
# to achieve the goals, the concepts of economic surplus, occupational diversity, farm productivity, and vertical and horizontal inequalities are used and found that marginal farm households experienced food insecurity because they were unable to meet their consumption needs with the income they earned. Even small farm households have a small surplus after meeting their consumption needs.
# the study concluded that majority of marginal and small farm households are in the lower income quintiles and have a more diverse occupational profile than their larger counterparts.
#Furthermore, farm households from lower castes are only in the marginal farm-size category and have the lowest income Policies to develop marginal farmer-centric farming systems and high value crops such as potato, cotton, sugarcane, and oilseeds; providing high yielding livestock breeds; value addition through farmer-producer organizations; non-farm employment through MGNREGA; provision of institutional credit at subsidized interest rates; and quality health and education facilities in the public sector are recommended to uplift.
# Overall the manuscript is very well written and data arrived from the manuscript is worthy.
Author Response
Comments by Reviewer 2
The MS titled "Understanding Sustenance of Small Farm Holders: A Study of Income Inequality among Farm Households in Indian Punjab" submitted to MDPI's Sustainability Journal is very interesting, and the authors did a commendable job. The interpretation for inequality among farm households in the Small farmer category is done correctly and well. The authors chose a farmer-dominated state in India for this study, and the data will be extremely useful in understanding farmer needs. The main strength of the manuscript is the review of literature gathered from recent findings or newly references, as well as the methodology used afterwards.
Reply to comments: Thank you for your positive comments
Reviewer comment 1: # as stated in manuscript that the sustainability of marginal and small farm households is an important issue in South Asia, as their numbers are regularly increasing. The main aim of this study is to assess their current socioeconomic profile and the challenges they face in order to create a development roadmap for underprivileged households.
Response 1: Thank you for your positive comments
Reviewer comment 2# to achieve the goals, the concepts of economic surplus, occupational diversity, farm productivity, and vertical and horizontal inequalities are used and found that marginal farm households experienced food insecurity because they were unable to meet their consumption needs with the income they earned. Even small farm households have a small surplus after meeting their consumption needs.
Response 2: Thank you for your positive comments
Reviewer comment 3# the study concluded that majority of marginal and small farm households are in the lower income quintiles and have a more diverse occupational profile than their larger counterparts.
Response 3: Thank you for your positive comments
Reviewer comment 4#Furthermore, farm households from lower castes are only in the marginal farm-size category and have the lowest income Policies to develop marginal farmer-centric farming systems and high value crops such as potato, cotton, sugarcane, and oilseeds; providing high yielding livestock breeds; value addition through farmer-producer organizations; non-farm employment through MGNREGA; provision of institutional credit at subsidized interest rates; and quality health and education facilities in the public sector are recommended to uplift.
Response 4: Thank you for your positive comments
Reviewer comment 5# Overall the manuscript is very well written and data arrived from the manuscript is worthy.
Response 5: Thank you for your positive comments
