Measurement Indicators and an Evaluation Approach for Assessing the Sustainable Development Capacity of Tropical Agriculture: A Case Study for Hainan Province, China
, Hongye Wang 5, Chaojia Nie 1,2, Jingjing Wang 6, Wenjiang Huang 1,2,3,4, Lingling Teng 7 and Mingquan Wu 1,3,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
1. Introduction
The article's introduction presents a comprehensive background of the need for sustainable agricultural practices to balance economic growth with environmental sustainability. The introduction highlights that China's rapid growth in agriculture production has resulted in a heavy toll on the ecological environment due to the over-exploitation of natural resources.
Overall, the introduction is informative and presents a good overview of the research area. However, it is quite lengthy and could be condensed to make it more concise. Also, there are a few grammatical errors and redundancies that should be addressed.
In terms of suggestions for improvement, the introduction could benefit from clearer and more specific research questions and objectives to engage the reader's interest. Additionally, the article would benefit from an explicit thesis statement outlining the study's goals and the direction the research will take.
Regarding flaws, one notable issue is the lack of sources for some of the claims made in the introduction, which undermines the author's credibility. For example, the author states that "China has largely managed to feed about a fifth of the world's population with a quarter of the world's total food production on less than 9% of the world's cultivated land." However, no citation is provided to support this claim.
Another flaw is the inconsistent use of citations throughout the introduction. The author cites some sources, but not all, which can create confusion for readers and undermine the article's credibility. Lastly, the introduction could benefit from more organization and coherence to help readers understand the structure and focus of the article.
2. Materials and methods
One suggestion for improvement would be to provide more detail about the methodology used to collect and analyze data to determine the values of the indicators used in the index system. It would also be helpful to include information about the sources of the data used for the study.
One flaw in the article is that the authors do not discuss the limitations of their study or any potential biases that may have affected their results. It is important to acknowledge and address these issues in order to accurately interpret the findings and understand their relevance for sustainable development in Hainan Province.
3. Results
Overall, the article presents an interesting evaluation of the sustainable development of tropical agriculture in Hainan Province over the past 30 years. The results show that the sustainable development level of tropical agriculture has improved in the province, particularly in the economic and social subsystems. The analysis of the spatial pattern of SDI in different counties or cities of the province is also informative.
However, the article has some flaws that need to be addressed. First, the article does not provide a clear definition of the SDI and how it is calculated. This lack of information makes it difficult to understand the results and assess their validity. Second, the article does not address the limitations or potential biases in the data used for the analysis, which could affect the accuracy of the results.
To improve the article, the authors should provide a clear definition of the SDI and how it is calculated. They should also address the limitations or potential biases in the data used for the analysis and offer suggestions for improvement or policy recommendations based on the results.
4&5 Measures and results
Firstly, the article could benefit from more detailed explanations of the proposed measures, including how they will be implemented and by whom. Secondly, the authors could discuss the potential challenges in implementing their suggestions and propose strategies to overcome them. Additionally, the authors could provide more information on the limitations of their study and how they addressed them.
One potential flaw in the article is the lack of information on the socioeconomic and political factors that could impact the implementation of the proposed measures. For example, the authors do not discuss how the interests of various stakeholders, including farmers, policymakers, and corporations, could affect the promotion of sustainable agriculture in Hainan. Finally, the authors could discuss the potential impact of their proposed measures on the broader ecosystem and society, beyond just the agricultural sector.
Author Response
Point 1: In my view, this paper much contributes to science, and specifically in agriculture sector. But some reflections to be considered are:
Response 1: We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your time and efforts in reviewing our article. Your positive feedback and encouragement have been instrumental in enhancing the quality of the final manuscript, and we are truly honored to have had the benefit of your expertise and insights.
Point 2:
- Introduction
The article's introduction presents a comprehensive background of the need for sustainable agricultural practices to balance economic growth with environmental sustainability. The introduction highlights that China's rapid growth in agriculture production has resulted in a heavy toll on the ecological environment due to the over-exploitation of natural resources.
Overall, the introduction is informative and presents a good overview of the research area. However, it is quite lengthy and could be condensed to make it more concise. Also, there are a few grammatical errors and redundancies that should be addressed.
In terms of suggestions for improvement, the introduction could benefit from clearer and more specific research questions and objectives to engage the reader's interest. Additionally, the article would benefit from an explicit thesis statement outlining the study's goals and the direction the research will take.
Regarding flaws, one notable issue is the lack of sources for some of the claims made in the introduction, which undermines the author's credibility. For example, the author states that "China has largely managed to feed about a fifth of the world's population with a quarter of the world's total food production on less than 9% of the world's cultivated land." However, no citation is provided to support this claim.
Another flaw is the inconsistent use of citations throughout the introduction. The author cites some sources, but not all, which can create confusion for readers and undermine the article's credibility. Lastly, the introduction could benefit from more organization and coherence to help readers understand the structure and focus of the article.
Response 2: We would like to thank you for your helpful comments. We have revised the introduction by merging the paragraphs on Chinese agriculture and Hainan agriculture, taking into account the relevance and readability of the entire study. We also removed some less relevant sentences. This has made the introduction more concise and clearer, making it easier for readers to follow.
Point 3:
- Materials and methods
One suggestion for improvement would be to provide more detail about the methodology used to collect and analyze data to determine the values of the indicators used in the index system. It would also be helpful to include information about the sources of the data used for the study.
One flaw in the article is that the authors do not discuss the limitations of their study or any potential biases that may have affected their results. It is important to acknowledge and address these issues in order to accurately interpret the findings and understand their relevance for sustainable development in Hainan Province.
Response 3: Thank you for your comment. We have included information on data sources and references in section 2.3. We appreciate your valuable suggestions. To address the limitations of our study, we have added a relevant information in the conclusion section highlighting the limitations of using statistical yearbook data. In the future, we plan to explore the use of big data technology, especially long-term remote sensing and geospatial information data, to better capture the ecological, environmental, and resource situations of regions or fields. This will enhance the accuracy and relevance of our results regarding sustainable development in tropical agriculture and provide scientific evidence to support its advancement.
Point 4:
- Results
Overall, the article presents an interesting evaluation of the sustainable development of tropical agriculture in Hainan Province over the past 30 years. The results show that the sustainable development level of tropical agriculture has improved in the province, particularly in the economic and social subsystems. The analysis of the spatial pattern of SDI in different counties or cities of the province is also informative.
However, the article has some flaws that need to be addressed. First, the article does not provide a clear definition of the SDI and how it is calculated. This lack of information makes it difficult to understand the results and assess their validity. Second, the article does not address the limitations or potential biases in the data used for the analysis, which could affect the accuracy of the results.
To improve the article, the authors should provide a clear definition of the SDI and how it is calculated. They should also address the limitations or potential biases in the data used for the analysis and offer suggestions for improvement or policy recommendations based on the results.
Response 4: Thanks. We have made some changes to the Sustainable Development Index (SDI) in order to improve its clarity for readers. To make it easier to understand, we have revised the wording and now refer to SDI as the Sustainability Index (SI). Additionally, we have also provided information on the calculation of SI and its functions in section 2.4.
Point 5:
4&5 Measures and results
Firstly, the article could benefit from more detailed explanations of the proposed measures, including how they will be implemented and by whom. Secondly, the authors could discuss the potential challenges in implementing their suggestions and propose strategies to overcome them. Additionally, the authors could provide more information on the limitations of their study and how they addressed them.
One potential flaw in the article is the lack of information on the socioeconomic and political factors that could impact the implementation of the proposed measures. For example, the authors do not discuss how the interests of various stakeholders, including farmers, policymakers, and corporations, could affect the promotion of sustainable agriculture in Hainan. Finally, the authors could discuss the potential impact of their proposed measures on the broader ecosystem and society, beyond just the agricultural sector.
Response 5: We agree that we have made modifications and improvements to the relevant measures and suggestions. We have added content that involves various stakeholders affecting the development of sustainable agriculture. The relevant content includes: Balancing the interests of all parties is required to achieve sustainable agriculture, with policymakers guiding agricultural transformation, enterprises emphasizing social responsibility, promoting sustainable production models, and collaborating closely with farmers. Furthermore, farmers need to adjust traditional agricultural production methods, improve production efficiency, and enhance economic benefits. Only when the interests of all parties are balanced, can sustainable agriculture be promoted.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic is very interesting and actual, especially regarding the evaluation of sustainable development in agriculture. However, a few areas exist that prevent this paper from being published in its current form. The rationale to underpin the research and the study design are adequately put forward. Nevertheless, a more detailed description of the specific novelty aspects of the work would be welcome in relation to the scientific hypotheses, given the aim of the research. It would be good if the arguments could be outlined more in relation to this aspect. Data carried out from the methodology adopted for the analysis should be more justified about their comparative value. A more detailed explanation would be welcome in the conclusion section to better highlight the interesting results carried out from this study.
Author Response
Point 1: The topic is very interesting and actual, especially regarding the evaluation of sustainable development in agriculture. However, a few areas exist that prevent this paper from being published in its current form. The rationale to underpin the research and the study design are adequately put forward. Nevertheless, a more detailed description of the specific novelty aspects of the work would be welcome in relation to the scientific hypotheses, given the aim of the research. It would be good if the arguments could be outlined more in relation to this aspect. Data carried out from the methodology adopted for the analysis should be more justified about their comparative value. A more detailed explanation would be welcome in the conclusion section to better highlight the interesting results carried out from this study.
Response 1: We are pleased that you have given our research a positive review. We have made thorough revisions, particularly to the conclusion, which has been further organised and summarised.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In my view, this paper much contributes to science, and specifically in agriculture sector. But some reflections to be considered are:
Abstract
I would recommend authors to add in a clear way the main aim of the research in the abstract.
Introduction
Needless to say, that talking about sustainability authors should talk about the Brundtland report from. So, I would suggest authors to introduce it.
Lines 70-72. I don’t see any link between the SDGs and the agricultural indicators. It is true that indicators are a valuable tool that allow measure sustainability in agriculture…or in other sector, but, the SDGs are different…certainly not all of them are linked to agriculture…so, maybe it would be interesting to highlight those agriculture related.
In line 76, authors are talking about food security…and, the sentence before does not match with this…it matches with production…and it increase, but not with food security. Therefore, I would suggest authors to write a coherent introduction, without mixing all these topics. For instance, around line 109…and so, they are describing the importance of the Chinese region in agriculture and later on, it environmental problems. This has been also described before around the two first paragraphs of the introduction.
Material and methods
In the Study area part, there should be some references since there are many data. Main crops, temperature, rainfall. Etc. Even some reference for Figure 1 would be appreciated.
Line 205 there is an extra final point
Table 1. it would be clear to introduce this Table after having explained how the weights of the different indicators were decided and by whom.
Although figure 3 is fine and very clear, I wonder whether all the indicators should be or not presented in a table. Maybe there would be better to see the 18, or maybe those figures do not offer much information. I would like authors to reflect about this. Thank you. Specially after having read the final part of the paper where all these figures are compared.
Figure 6. Although this kind of pie-chart are useful in representing sustainability, in my view…since we have positive C-indicators and negative, this kind of chart does not make any sense. I mean, if being close to the 25% is the best, when the surface is higher it should be more sustainable, because the index should be higher…and for instance, C4 is positive and C5 is negative…so, if both have been treated the same…the information is wrong.
Finally, and concerning the conclusion part I would suggest authors to rethink it because it should answer the previous objectives set down in the paper (at the beginning).
Some more interesting references on agricultural sustainability-methodology are:
ttps://doi.org/10.3390/su11030738
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031090
Considering that it deals with a methodology work there should be more references.
Author Response
Point 1: In my view, this paper much contributes to science, and specifically in agriculture sector. But some reflections to be considered are:
Response 1: We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your time and efforts in reviewing our article. Your positive feedback and encouragement have been instrumental in enhancing the quality of the final manuscript, and we are truly honored to have had the benefit of your expertise and insights.
Abstract
Point 2: I would recommend authors to add in a clear way the main aim of the research in the abstract.
Response 2: Thanks. We agree. We have added the main aim of the research in the abstract.
Introduction
Point 3: Needless to say, that talking about sustainability authors should talk about the Brundtland report from. So, I would suggest authors to introduce it.
Response 3: Thanks. We agree. In the introduction, we mentioned the report Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report.
Point 4: Lines 70-72. I don’t see any link between the SDGs and the agricultural indicators. It is true that indicators are a valuable tool that allow measure sustainability in agriculture…or in other sector, but, the SDGs are different…certainly not all of them are linked to agriculture…so, maybe it would be interesting to highlight those agriculture related.
Response 4: We agree. We have revised the statement that “Some indicators among the 17 SDGs can be valuable for measuring and evaluating the sustainability in agriculture, including land, water resources, climate conditions, sustainable production and consumption”
Point 5: In line 76, authors are talking about food security…and, the sentence before does not match with this…it matches with production…and it increase, but not with food security. Therefore, I would suggest authors to write a coherent introduction, without mixing all these topics. For instance, around line 109…and so, they are describing the importance of the Chinese region in agriculture and later on, it environmental problems. This has been also described before around the two first paragraphs of the introduction.
Response 5: We agree. We have condensed the introduction to make it more concise.
Material and methods
Point 6: In the Study area part, there should be some references since there are many data. Main crops, temperature, rainfall. Etc. Even some reference for Figure 1 would be appreciated.
Response 6: We agree. We have added the references.
Point 7: Line 205 there is an extra final point
Response 7: Thanks. We have made the revisions.
Point 8: Table 1. it would be clear to introduce this Table after having explained how the weights of the different indicators were decided and by whom.
Response 8: Thanks. We agree and have made the revisions.
Point 9: Although figure 3 is fine and very clear, I wonder whether all the indicators should be or not presented in a table. Maybe there would be better to see the 18, or maybe those figures do not offer much information. I would like authors to reflect about this. Thank you. Specially after having read the final part of the paper where all these figures are compared.
Response 9: Thank you for your excellent suggestion. We have made the modifications to Figures 2 and 5 by adding numerical information to the images.
Point 10: Figure 6. Although this kind of pie-chart are useful in representing sustainability, in my view…since we have positive C-indicators and negative, this kind of chart does not make any sense. I mean, if being close to the 25% is the best, when the surface is higher it should be more sustainable, because the index should be higher…and for instance, C4 is positive and C5 is negative…so, if both have been treated the same…the information is wrong.
Response 10: We would like to thank you for your helpful comments. Our original intention in using Figure 6 was to show the changes in sustainable agricultural development in Hainan Province over different time periods. However, it is true that the information in Figure 6 is also shown in Figure 5. Therefore, following your comments, we have removed Figure 6.
Point 11: Finally, and concerning the conclusion part I would suggest authors to rethink it because it should answer the previous objectives set down in the paper (at the beginning).
Response 11: Thanks. We agree. We have made revisions and improvements to the conclusion part.
Point 12: Some more interesting references on agricultural sustainability-methodology are:
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030738
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031090
Considering that it deals with a methodology work there should be more references.
Response 12: Thank you very much for your suggestions. We have added some methodological references accordingly.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Certainly, I consider this new version of the manuscript ready to be published in Sustainability journal. All my comments and suggestions made have been correctly approached.
