Can Land Transfer Promote Agricultural Green Transformation? The Empirical Evidence from China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments:
The problem raised by the authors is genuine, and defined and presented well. However, the manuscript requires to address the following first:
1. The general structure is not clearly defined as whether the manuscript is a research or review article.
2. Authors should strictly follow the guidelines of the journal for the general body structure of the manuscript.
3. It is quite surprising to me, how the academic editor of the journal forwarded this manuscript for review without assessing the general requirement of this article.
Although, the manuscript is written well and presented the role of land transfer in China's agricultural green transformation. However, based on the above comments, I recommend a major revision for this manuscript.
Thanks.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks very much for your comments on our manuscript. We are pleased to submit the revised version for further consideration for possible publication. In this version, we have made a point-by-point edit in response of your comments and believed that your guidance has resulted in a substantially improvement of our manuscript.
We look forward to your feedback on this revised version.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article contains an analysis and review of the impact of land transfer on green agricultural transformation.
In general, the article may be useful to readers interested in this topic. However, my attention is immediately attracted by the abundance of repetitive narratives and phrases that are more like some kind of slogans than scientific constructions. There are also some problems in the methodological part.
I have the following comments:
1) It is not very clear to me why the authors single out Section 2. In fact, this is a continuation of the Introduction. Moreover, the content is repetitive. This section, like the Introduction, contains mostly general phrases about the benefits of land transfer. Neither the introduction nor this section contains specific examples of this practice in some regions of the world. The methodological basis is not described. Phrases about technological progress are extremely general. This section needs to be revised. If the authors want to single out hypotheses separately, then they need to be formulated scientifically. The phrases “Land transfer can significantly promote the green transformation of green agriculture” and “Technological progress has a significant intermediary effect in the process of land transfer to promote agricultural green transformation” are not scientific hypotheses, but are slogans. How exactly can land transfers be promoted? What parameter is hypothetically affected? etc. The paragraphs below have some thoughts on this, but in essence they repeat the introduction a lot. It is better to clearly formulate hypotheses. And the last hypothesis remained a slogan.
2) In the third paragraph, authors need to indicate the source of the data and provide a link. Otherwise, it is impossible to verify the results of the study.
3) In paragraph 3.1. linear equations are given. First, not all designations are deciphered. The designations of dependent variables are not specified. They need to be specified. But if I understand correctly, ?? is agricultural energy consumption, ?? is agricultural carbon emission, ?? is agricultural technology progress? Then it turns out that agricultural technology progress is just the amount of land transfer in different regions of China? Perhaps this is some definition from the state program of China. But then authors need to explain this in the beginning of the section for readers from other countries.
4) In paragraph 3.2.1. Table 1 shows the coefficients that the authors took from the China energy statistical yearbook (line 210). The link is to source 48, but this is not China energy statistical yearbook, is China statistical yearbook open source? It is advisable to indicate it as the primary source, including in the table itself.
5) In paragraph 3.2.1. Table 2 also does not provide references to most sources (Reference source)
6) Clause 3.2.3. Mechanism analysis of variables is essentially Interpretive variables. The definition given there is not clear. Only at the very end of this paragraph there is some information in substance.
7) 3.3. Data description: The sources are named, but there are no references.
8) Results and conclusions. The authors showed that land transfer significantly promotes agricultural green transformation on the southeast side of the Hu Huanyong-Line, and in economically developed areas. This is perhaps the most interesting and important result. As a result, in order to obtain the desired effect, it is necessary that the region has a high level of economic development. Another interesting result concerns the geographical component. However, the article lacks an analysis (in the Discussion and Introduction) of a similar method in other regions of the world. In particular, this applies to large countries where you can see the geographical gradient.
9) Based on the previous comment, I have a question: if there is a statistically significant dependence of the considered effect on the level of economic development of the region and geographical location (more precisely, belonging to the southeast side of the Hu Huanyong-Line), then why do we need a generalized analysis, which is two three articles?
10) The attention is drawn almost exclusively to Chinese reference sources. But authors are dealing with global processes of carbon emissions, the "greening" of agriculture, so authors need to consider other sources that describe similar practices in other regions of the planet.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks very much for your comments on our manuscript. We are pleased to submit the revised version for further consideration for possible publication. In this version, we have made a point-by-point edit in response of your comments and believed that your guidance has resulted in a substantially improvement of our manuscript.
We look forward to your feedback on this revised version.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors and editors:
Please see my referee report which is chosen by the review system.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Dear authors and editors:
Please see my referee report which is chosen by the review system.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks very much for your comments on our manuscript. We are pleased to submit the revised version for further consideration for possible publication. In this version, we have made a point-by-point edit in response of your comments and believed that your guidance has resulted in a substantially improvement of our manuscript.
We look forward to your feedback on this revised version.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The article addresses an interesting topic; it is well-organized. However, it requires several amendments.
The literature review needs to be supplemented with the following information: who dealt with a similar research topic before, what are the results of prior studies, how the research conducted by the Authors is positioned among previous researchers, and what gap in existing knowledge is filled by these analyses. Since some of this information is in the discussion section, this part must also be modified. There, the Authors should focus on assessing the findings and/or the statistical analysis and comparing the results to the findings of other researchers.
Moreover, it would be worthwhile to present the land transfer issue in China (in the introduction or the literature review). It will help outline the context of the analyzed problem.
The results section should be augmented with interpreting the results (i.e., the data acquired during the analysis). Without this, it partially duplicates the information presented in the literature review.
Furthermore, some sections need to be revised as they are unclear, especially the last paragraph of the literature review and the content of sections 3.2.1-3.2.3. The title of Table 4 should be better aligned with the table's content.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks very much for your comments on our manuscript. We are pleased to submit the revised version for further consideration for possible publication. In this version, we have made a point-by-point edit in response of your comments and believed that your guidance has resulted in a substantially improvement of our manuscript.
We look forward to your feedback on this revised version.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
As the authors provided a lot of revision in the revised manuscript. Now this manuscript can be processed further.
Thanks.
Regards
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thanks for your comments on our revised version. We deeply appreciated your efforts on helping us to improve the quality of our manuscript.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the uploaded referee report.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Please see the uploaded referee report.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We have checked the content of the paper and feel that our revision has fully expressed the meaning of this paper. My co-authors Guoqun Ma, Danyang Lv, Tuanbiao Jiang and myself are pleased to submit a revised version of the paper titled " Can land transfer promote agricultural green transformation? The empirical evidence from China " to Sustainability for further process. This submission includes a manuscript, the response and the highlights. We look forward to your feedback on this revised submission.
Sincerely,
Guoqun Ma
Danyang Lv
Tuanbiao Jiang
Yuxi Luo
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper shows some improvements compared to the previous version. Since all my comments have been basically addressed, I recommend accepting the revised version of the manuscript for publication in Sustainability.
