Agricultural Economic Resilience in the Context of International Food Price Fluctuation—An Empirical Analysis on the Main Grain–Producing Areas in Northeast China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

My Comments

Research framework and literature review [Line 120]

While this section provided a good research framework for agricultural economic resilience, little is said about existing empirical studies on the topic in China and around the world. To strengthen this study's contribution, the authors must clearly highlight studies on agricultural economic resilience in China and elsewhere, as well as demonstrate how their study advances this literature.

Multiple regression model [Line 275]

This model appears to have overlooked the data's longitudinal nature, as there are repeated observations on the same agricultural regions over time. The authors assume that there is no temporal dependence between the observations. This needs to be addressed by either re-running the models with the longitudinal dimension of the data or justifying why the current method is adequate.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive comments. Addressing these issues has made this article more informative, and I have revised the article in line with your comments. The revision instructions and details of the changes have been uploaded as an attachment, and I look forward to your response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I have no comments on the reviewed article. All its elements are coherent, the arguments are convincing, and the research results are clearly and specifically described.

 

What could be improved, supplemented, in the conclusions, there is no comparison of the obtained results with others already present in the literature. It would be much more interesting and broader to show the authors' results on the results of other authors so far.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive comments. Addressing these issues has made this article more informative, and I have revised the article in line with your comments. The revision instructions and details of the changes have been uploaded as an attachment, and I look forward to your response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive comments. Addressing these issues has made this article more informative, and I have revised the article in line with your comments. The revision instructions and details of the changes have been uploaded as an attachment, and I look forward to your response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

This paper investigates the evolutionary process of agricultural economic resilience and its impact mechanisms. The topic is interesting and the writing is well. However, some questions need to be addressed.

1. The contributions are not clear. The authors do not provide contributions in the manuscript. These should be added.

 

2. The authors do not explain in detail of the Figure 1 in section 2. It seems Figure 1 can be deleted or should be explained more in the main text.

 

3. The analysis is not very convincing. The authors want to see What is the degree of influence of international food price fluctuations at different stages on agricultural economic resilience. And in their abstract, they state “international food prices exert different degrees of influence on agricultural economic resilience at different stages”. However, this result cannot be drawn from the analysis in section 4. They only show the status of international food price and agricultural economic resilience from 2005-2021 in section 4.1 and section 4.2. There is no causal relationship or even correlation relationship between international food price and agricultural economic resilience. The authors should add a section to better show the causal relationship between international food price and agricultural economic resilience.

 

4. the explained reasons for the results in section 4 should be linked to previous literature. And the results should be compared with the other literature.

 

5. standard errors should be reported in Table 3, thus the readers can tell the significance of each variable.

 

 

6. section 6 Discussion should be in the front of section 5 conclusions. 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your constructive comments. Addressing these issues has made this article more informative, and I have revised the article in line with your comments. The revision instructions and details of the changes have been uploaded as an attachment, and I look forward to your response.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have proved that the statistical methods applied are adequate thus improving the reliability and validity of the study.

Reviewer 4 Report

I am fine with the responses.