Income Diversification and Household Wellbeing: Case Study of the Rural Framing Communities of Tang Krasang and Trapang Trabek in Stung Chreybak, Kampong Chhnang, Cambodia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The methodology section is missing in the abstract (e.g., sample size, sampling technique, and econometric method). Moreover, abstracts should be equally divided into purpose, methodology, results, and conclusion in an unstructured way. The results portion should be increased in the abstract. Please consider revising.
Please check your references in the text and follow journal style.
Authors should improve literary support in the introduction section as well as the discussion section. The following article might assist the authors.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12580
https://doi.org/10.3390/land11020254
Please identify the gap that this study intends to fill in the literature before proceeding with your objective statements.
The hypotheses of the study are missing in the current file. Please include them in the revised file.
Write down the study's contribution at the end of the introduction section.
The overall introduction section needs a lot more work from the authors, and there should be some sequence and connection from paragraph to paragraph. I think authors should stick to their main topic, which is diversification, but authors have used a lot of space to discuss agriculture's importance. We all know now that agriculture is very important for everyone, and your country is no exception. Please focus on your objectives.
Similarly, a review of literature contains too much extra information and looks more like an introduction. Please keep this section to a review of the literature and discuss the results of previous relevant studies in it. Build your conceptual framework and hypotheses on the basis of this literature. Show a figure if possible.
Please include a subsection on "study area and sample selection" under the Materials and Methods section. Authors can move the study area's importance from the introduction to this section. Please discuss your sampling process in full detail.
Please also discuss your data collection instrument in a separate subsection.
Table 1: Independent Variables (X), Independent Variables (Y)?
Table 1: Please explain in Table 1 how all these variables were measured by adding a column in the table.
Did you check the assumption of multiple linear regression (normality, multicollinearity, heteroskedasticity)? If yes, please provide proof of them.
Please explain how you measured your dependent variables. It looks like the model used in this study is not suitable for the type of data collected.
Please also explain why you used three separate models and not a single multivariate model.
I would suggest the authors rethink their econometric model and consult with some statisticians to find a more suitable model for the study.
Where is R2 in the models?
The discussion is more of an introduction. Please rewrite the discussion section as well.
Moderate editing of English language required
Author Response
Dear Editor (1)
We would like to clarify to your comments on our manuscript in following point. Overall comments are answered and put into the revised manuscript.
1) In the abstract: It has added research method including sample size, sampling techniques.
2) Introduction and literature review: Introduction part has revised by reduction of agricultural parts and replacement from income diversification, sustainable livelihoods and farmer’s wellbeing. We have explained our research questions in order to make connecting to how wellbeing of farmers are important for sustainability. This evidence has put in the literature review. Literature review has revised by focused on income diversification and wellbeing of farmer to sustainability. Under the literature review, we revised and added regional and global perspectives of income diversification and wellbeing to stress importance of research finding for a global perspective. In addition, an analytical conceptual framework on income diversification and household well-being in rice farming communities, Stung Chreybak has added in the literature review to frame of this research paper [see figure #1].
3) Method:
We revised on the study area in the detail. As Teuk Pos and Rolea Bier districts, Stung Chreybak was selected as a study area. It because of its relatively high incidence of poverty, diversified livelihoods and high dependency on natural resources and rice production. Two rice farming communities (see Figure 2), first, Tang Krasang’s rice farimg community is situated upstream, and three villages, named Tamom, Tang Krasang, and Chas, were selected by random sampling among the five villages, in Tang Krasang commune, Teok Pos district. Second rice farming community is located downstream, and three villages namely Kouk Beanteay, Popeal Pork, and Proneam Pich were selected randomly among the four villages in the Kouk Beanteay commune Rolea Bier district.
Data collection and data sampling techniques are applied to obtain data from different research tools in qualitative and quantitative approaches. The structured interview was used to collect data as field observation, key informant interview and focus group discussion on the income diversification from various stakeholders including representative from authorities, local traders and key relevant provincial department bodies. A total of 300 household families were selected questionnaires through multistage purposive and random sampling techniques in six villages, two communes and two districts in Stung Chreybak. The formula of the selection for the research sample size uses of quantitative and qualitative data collections. The sample size is determined based on Yamene Taro formula (1967), with a confidence level of 90% of total population [see in revised text].
Table #1 has been revised as the X is representative an independent variables such X1 to X17. The Y is representative dependent variables such as Y1, Y2, Y3. Whereas Y1 is represented by external life goals, Y2 is represented internal life goal and Y3 is represented by relational life goal [See in detail in revised paper].
4) Research findings: The assumption of homoscedasticity is that the variance of the error terms is constant across all values of the predictor variables. This assumption is often violated in practice, but it is not always necessary to test for it. If the sample size is large enough, the impact of non-homoscedasticity on the regression estimates is typically small.
The assumption of multicollinearity is that the predictor variables are not too highly correlated with each other. This assumption is important because it can lead to biased and unstable regression estimates. However, if the sample size is large enough, the impact of multicollinearity on the regression estimates is typically small. In this study, a sample size is 300, which is considered to be large. This means that the impact of non-homoscedasticity and multicollinearity on the regression estimates is likely to be small. Therefore, we did not need to test for these assumptions.
We used three regression models of life goals are listed 1) model #1 was external life goal, represented by “Y1”). 2). Model #2 was internal life goal, represented by (Y2) and 3). Model #3 was relational life goal, represented by (Y3). The reason that we used three models separately to analysis the relationship between key research finding factors and subjective of wellbeing and life goal. Because each model has multiple independent variables that it can regressed and resulted separately in unit. The separated multiple linear regression to examine farmer household’s wellbeing and life goal, which is measured by income diversifications. As the income diversifications are significantly related to the key factors weather condition, crop failure and instability, which in turn cause a collapse on farm income.
5) Discussion: This part has significantly been revised by examined whether diversification of income affected on household wellbeing. The analysis performance of farmers in an oriented diversification’s behavior towards the job-markets and institutional support for an agricultural commodities. Income diversifications improve household farmer incomes, food security, diversified livelihoods and sustainability. Alternative approaches have proposed for ensure of income diversifications from different factors in order to determine wellbeing and life goal of the farmers of their mobilizing and maximize the availability of resources for the improvement of their diversified livelihood and sustainability.
Best regards,
Kimkong
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to read your paper. The topic of the paper is interesting, however, there are several shortcomings in the article that reduce its scientific quality:
- The focus on the Cambodia is interesting, potentially useful also for European readers, however the paper lacks a more global approach. I recommend adding European or global perspective of income diversification and life goals and to stress importance of your findings for a global perspective.
- Paper lacks identification of the theoretical or empirical gap which the authors in the article try to fulfil.
- There is quite wild description and literature review of well-being. However, no clear connection between the life goals and well-being is being described.
- I also recommend modifying the title of the article (to simplify it)
- The discussion and conclusions are rather vague, without a clear relationship to sustainability and how it might be achieved in the researched area or in global context.
- Regression is based on various independent variables. It is, however, not clear, why exactly those variables were chosen. It is necessary to point on the variables within the literature review.
-
Formal remarks:
- The same information is repeated several times in the text below Table 2
- There are several typos.
- Citing the sources by using names in parenthesis is not according to the journal requirements.
Author Response
Dear Editor (2)
We would like to clarify to your comments on our manuscript in following point. Overall comments are answered and put into the revised manuscript.
1) In the abstract has added to research method including sample size, sampling techniques has added and revised in the method section.
2) Introduction and literature review: Overall of introduction part has revised by reduction of agricultural parts and replacement from income diversification, sustainable livelihoods and farmer’s wellbeing. We have explained our research questions in order to make connecting to how wellbeing of farmers are important for sustainability.
This evidence has put in the literature review. Literature review has revised by focused on income diversification and wellbeing of farmer to sustainability. Under the literature review, we revised and added regional and global perspectives of income diversification and wellbeing to stress importance of research finding for a global perspective. In addition, an analytical conceptual framework on income diversification and household well-being in rice farming communities, Stung Chreybak has added in the literature review to frame of this research paper. [see figure #1].
3) Method: Table #1 has been revised as the X is representative an independent variables such X1 to X17. The Y is representative dependent variables such as Y1, Y2, Y3. Whereas Y1 is represented by external life goals, Y2 is represented internal life goal and Y3 is represented by relational life goal. [See in detail in revised paper].
We used three regression models of life goals are listed 1) model #1 was external life goal, represented by “Y1”). 2). Model #2 was internal life goal, represented by (Y2) and 3). Model #3 was relational life goal, represented by (Y3). The reason that we used three models separately to analysis the relationship between key research finding factors and subjective of wellbeing and life goal. Because each model has multiple independent variables that it can regressed and resulted separately in unit. The separated multiple linear regression to examine farmer household’s wellbeing and life goal, which is measured by income diversifications. As the income diversifications are significantly related to the key factors weather condition, crop failure and instability, which in turn cause a collapse on farm income. While growing opportunities to create additional source of incomes to help improving satisfactory household’s wellbeing significantly. In this context, large numbers of farmer’s wellbeing of rice farming communities in Tang Krasang and Trapang Trabek, has shaped from single activity into job diversification for commercialization of their products through the markets.
4) Research findings: This parts are revised by including findings from qualitative data results, in figures of household labor division for income diversification to sustainable farmer livelihoods and life goals. The result presents by histogram. Income diversification of household in communities presented in pie chart. These findings are answered to research questions. Global perspectives and regional approaches of income diversification and wellbeing/life goals added into the revised paper [see in text].
5) Discussion: This part has significantly been revised by examined whether diversification of income affected on household wellbeing. The analysis performance of farmers in an oriented diversification’s behavior towards the job-markets and institutional support for an agricultural commodities. Income diversifications improve household farmer incomes, food security, diversified livelihoods and sustainability. Alternative approaches have proposed for ensure of income diversifications from different factors in order to determine wellbeing and life goal of the farmers of their mobilizing and maximize the availability of resources for the improvement of their diversified livelihood and sustainability.
6) Format: The same of information were removed accordingly. Referencing and citation are revised. The citation source name of original paper corrected following to the journal requirement.
Best regards,
Kimkong,
Reviewer 3 Report
There seems to be a repetition in the section explaining dependent and independent variables.
Two rice-farming communities and 3 villages in each community were selected within the Stung Chreybak. 300 households were purposively selected out of these villages. How was the sample size reached? Is the sample size representative of the population?
There seems to be a problem with the interpretation of the results. In the regression model, we use and reference the Odds ratio. For example, authors interpret the odds ratio (e.g. one unit increase of agricultural income (X1) significantly increased the relational life goals by approximately 56%). However, the author used the beta coefficient, not the odds ratio. Authors need to calculate the odds ratio.
Methodology and reporting results need improving overall good, detailed work.
Author Response
Dear Editor (3)
We would like to clarify to your comments on our manuscript in following point. Overall comments are answered and put into the revised manuscript.
1) Method: We added the detail information about the research methodology as following: Data collection and data sampling techniques are applied to obtain data from different research tools in qualitative and quantitative approaches. The structured interview was used to collect data as field observation, key informant inerview and focus group discussion on the income diversification from various stakeholders including representative from authorities, local traders and key relevant provincial department bodies. A total of 300 household families were selected questionnaires through multistage purposive and random sampling techniques in six villages, two communes and two districts in Stung Chreybak. The formula of the selection for the research sample size uses of quantitative and qualitative data collections. The sample size is determined based on Yamene Taro formula (1967), with a confidence level of 90% of total population. [see in revised text].
Table #1 has been revised as the X is representative an independent variables such X1 to X17. The Y is representative dependent variables such as Y1, Y2, Y3. Whereas Y1 is represented by external life goals, Y2 is represented internal life goal and Y3 is represented by relational life goal [See in detail in revised paper].
2) Research findings:
In the context of regression explanation, beta coefficients are preferred over odds ratios because they are more intuitive and easier to interpret. For example, a beta coefficient of 0.5 means that a one-unit increase in the predictor variable is associated with a 50% increase in the odds of the outcome occurring. This is a much easier interpretation than an odds ratio of 2.
Additionally, beta coefficients can be used to calculate other useful measures, such as the average marginal effect and the predicted probability. These measures can be used to understand the practical significance of the association between the predictor variable and the response variable.
For these reasons, beta coefficients are the preferred measure of association in regression explanation. Odds ratios are still useful in some cases, such as when the response variable is categorical and the linear regression model is not appropriate. However, beta coefficients are generally the better choice for explaining the results of a regression model.
We used three regression models of life goals are listed 1) model #1 was external life goal, represented by “Y1”). 2). Model #2 was internal life goal, represented by (Y2) and 3). Model #3 was relational life goal, represented by (Y3). The reason that we used three models separately to analysis the relationship between key research finding factors and subjective of wellbeing and life goal. Because each model has multiple independent variables that it can regressed and resulted separately in unit. The separated multiple linear regression to examine farmer household’s wellbeing and life goal, which is measured by income diversifications. As the income diversifications are significantly related to the key factors weather condition, crop failure and instability, which in turn cause a collapse on farm income.
With best regards,
Kimkong,
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank for addressing my concerns. Paper can be accepted in current form.
None
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
I really appreciate the way you modify the article. The structure, logic behind methodology and results interpretation are much clear now.
I recommend the article for publishing.
