Impact of Market Participation of Indigenous Crops on Household Food Security of Smallholder Farmers of South Africa

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The title of the article should be shortened and made more attractive to the reader. At the same time, the title of the article in the view and in the article file are different.

2. The text of the article should be placed in the template. The article should be drawn up according to the requirements.

3. Formulas should be formatted as required and numbered.

4. The amount of interest in fig. 1 and Fig. 2 is not equal to 100%. Need to check and clarify.

5. It would be necessary to determine the prospects for research in the corresponding direction.

6. The reference must be checked and completed in accordance with the requirements.

7. One of the weaknesses of the reference is that only a few sources are relatively new. In fact, there are no sources for 2021-2022. Therefore, it is suggested to update it somewhat. In particular, we recommend adding the following articles to the discussion:

Junaidi, J., Amril, A., & Hernando, R. (2022). Economic coping strategies and food security in poor rural households. Agricultural and Resource Economics, 8(1), 30-51. https://doi.org/10.51599/are.2022.08.01.02

Kwaw-Nimeson, E., & Tian, Z. (2021). The impact of agricultural producer price on sustainable food security in Africa – a system GMM approach. Agricultural and Resource Economics, 7(3), 60-76. https://doi.org/10.51599/are.2021.07.03.04

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. Please receive the corrections.

Reviewer 2 Report

The study presented in this manuscript attempts to analyse food insecurity and the commercialisation of indigenous crops in South Africa. Unfortunately, the paper fails in a number of ways to reach scientific standards sufficient for publishing. Some of the main shortcomings are listed below:

The research problems is not clearly stated – the authors initially argue that ‘this study aimed at providing evidence-based information on how the commercialisation of indigenous crops can improve the household food security of smallholder farmers’ [sic], but then they write: ‘The main intention of this research was to estimate the factors that influence commercialisation and the extent of commercialisation among indigenous crops’ smallholder farmers’ [sic]. Please note that the two things are very different. The big issue is that this is not even clarified throughout the paper. As a suggestion, in the result section the relationship between food security and commercialisation of indigenous crops should be given more prominence, as this is, seemingly, the main outcome of this research. This point then should be picked up again in the discussion/conclusion sections also in comparison with existing literature.

The materials and methods section is further problematic. It should be stated more clearly what the original data source for the study was. Reading between the lines, the reader would assume that it is the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), but this is not properly referenced and overall not at all clear. A scientific manuscript needs to have a complete reference list, including the access dates of data sources used (e.g. DAFF and SAVAC are both missing in the list). Also, the authors need to be more explicit what the cut-off is for farm size to be considered small.  In the same section the authors claim that it is important to have results/information at individual farm level but it is unclear why. A number of other sentences are also unclear and/or needs some explanation: e.g. ‘Despite the fact that the data was collected in 2016, the results are still relevant and very important in enhancing the smallholder farmers’ situation regarding their market participation’ [sic], ‘Moreover, the public authority as a regulator of this data, and thus, has a premium in what comes out from the data to the extent of system and program ideas’ [sic]. As one can see from this last excerpt, the English language is  poor at times which makes it not possible for the reader to understand what the authors mean.

Overall the manuscript would need to be rewritten in a more precise language and scientifically sounded manner. Many sentences are speculative and lack references: e.g. ‘Also, they have been producing and consuming these crops, it’s just that they are not well recognised’ [sic], ‘As a result, the availability of indigenous crops could enhance food and nutrition security due to their nutritional benefits’ [sic], ‘This could be as a result of the limited production of these indigenous crops, inadequate for both consumption and selling’ [sic], ‘This could be due to laziness’ [sic].

The discussion and conclusion section is fuzzy in part as a both depending on the comments above and the fact that the research problem has still not been clearly stated. Several statements are either self-evident (e.g. ‘Therefore, the increment of productivity means more produce being sold to the market and more income’ [sic]), or not substantiated by the results and overall generic e.g. ‘Furthermore, there is a need for more workshops’ [sic].

 

Author Response

Your comments were very helpful. Thank you. Please receive the corrections.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 

This is an interesting study, in-depth study with interesting socio-economic considerations with a good (very clear) statistical analysis of the variables considered.

"The results showed that partaking in the commercialization of indigenous crops plays a significant role in the household food security of smallholder farmers. This is due to them mainly focusing more on commercialization than consumption".

Note* an important thing to describe could be represented by the total production  of indigenous crops per year, and if necessary increase these productions

 

 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please receive the responses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please kindly see an attached document with responses.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx