Forest Dwellers’ Dependence on Forest Resources in Semi-Arid Environments

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I think it's an interesting topic. The contents of the review are as follows.

 

1. Introduction 

 

In line 80-82 : “However, none of the existing studies investigated the type and extent of dependence among forest dwellers in the context of Iran.” 

Since this journal is an international journal, there is a need to review previous studies conducted in other countries (other than Iran) on how people living in forests depend on resources. Otherwise, it should be directly specified why it is crucial to investigate this matter specifically in the context of Iran. 

 

 

In line 83-85 : “This study attempts to investigate the type and extent of dependence of local communities on forest resources, specifically in the Central Zagros.” 

Elaborate on why there is a need for international readers to know about the dependence of local communities on forest resources in Iran. To this end, there must be an analysis of prior studies dealing with topics similar to those in various continents, countries, and regions other than Iran. The analysis of previous studies on "Forest dwellers' dependence on forest resources" is insufficient. For example, the pattern of “forest dwellers’ dependence eon forest resources” can differ by continent/country (advanced vs. developing). Therefore, more intensive reviews or prior studies are required. 

 

2. Materials and Methods

 

In line 121 – 126 : “A total of 170 questionnaires were completed through personal interviews with the head of the household, and this represented 18.7% of the total population in the five studied villages. Based on Cochran’s formula, an error acceptance rate of 0.07 was recorded [26]. The content validity approach based on Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to determine the validity of the questionnaire, and the reliability of the questionnaire was computed to be 0.77. 

 

In the social survey analysis, it is necessary to explain more kindly what numerical criteria the quantitative values for 18.7%, 0.07, and 0.77 represent (mean). 

 

 

In line 133 : I don't quite understand table 1. It means the number of households in the survey, but what does the number of questions imply? Does the No. of questionnaires mean that the survey contents are different for each village? It is stated in the abstract that 170 households were surveyed, but in the table, it is indicated as  906. Which is the right information?

 

3. Results 

 

In line 216-217 : “The variables of age, household size, household income, and forest farming were positively associated with wood consumption, use of medicinal plants, and use of edible plants” 

 

“Jo, J. H., Roh, T., Shin, S., & Youn, Y. C. (2019). Sustainable assets and strategies affecting the forestry household income: Empirical evidence from south korea. A study by Sustainability, 11(13), 3680" reports that forest household income is divided into the sum of forest income (FI), non-forestry income (NFI), and transfer income (TI). Accordingly, shouldn't we look at forest income (FI) as a target, not forest household income to define the definitions of forest dependency? What about your data? Did you also divide the forest household income into forest income (FI), non-forestry income (NFI), and transfer income (TI)?

 

In line 218 : Whereas education level had a negative correlation with forest dependencies.

 

Why did this happen? There is the only presentation of results and no interpretation. Will all countries also exhibit this trend? The study mentioned above by Jo et al. (2019) showed that households with high education levels secured more transfer income (TI) such as government subsidies. Because their technology efficiency and marketing skills were better, their forest household income was higher. It is necessary to discuss your finding in more detail concerning other study’s findings. 

 

In line 219-221 :  “This indicated that as the education level of the head of the household increases, the amount of dependence on the forest decreases.” 

Why did this happen? Similarly, there is the only presentation of results and no interpretation.

 

In line 222 : There are no sources of Socioeconomic Indexs presented in Table 9. After the introduction section, create a Hypothesis setting step and indicate the prior studies that are the basis for the variables presented in the studies related to the subject of this study.

 

 

4. Discussion 

In line 269 – 271 : “This finding supported the study by Godoy et al. [30] who found that forest dependence increased with age of the household head, but contradicted that of Garekae et al. [35] who found that forest 

dependence reduced with age.   

 

Further discussion is needed on why the difference between ages appeared based on the discussions of these previous studies. Why do you think they use more products as their age increases? In which country were the prior studies conducted? Is it because the environment and social context of which research target are more similar? Therefore, it is necessary to present the answer to these questions in the text.

 

In line 289-293 : Hegde and Enters [36] suggested that people with higher education were less livelihood dependence on forest resources. This could be explained by having a better education would lead to increase employment opportunities [30]. This finding also aligned with a study by Garekae et al. [35] who found that forest dependence had reduced with increase in education. 

In some countries, the higher the household managers' education level, the higher the forest household income. There are other countries where the higher the forest household income, the higher the forest dependency. In other words, both results can happen. For what reason do you think this study's country and target forests show the same results as those of Hegde and Enters [36] and Garekae et al. [35]? Discussion is needed for that reason.

 

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer #1:

 

1. Introduction

 In line 80-82 : “However, none of the existing studies investigated the type and extent of dependence among forest dwellers in the context of Iran.” Since this journal is an international journal, there is a need to review previous studies conducted in other countries (other than Iran) on how people living in forests depend on resources. Otherwise, it should be directly specified why it is crucial to investigate this matter specifically in the context of Iran.

Response:

In lines (78-89), the studies related to the subject on a global scale were discussed.

 

In line 83-85 : “This study attempts to investigate the type and extent of dependence of local communities on forest resources, specifically in the Central Zagros.” Elaborate on why there is a need for international readers to know about the dependence of local communities on forest resources in Iran. To this end, there must be an analysis of prior studies dealing with topics similar to those in various continents, countries, and regions other than Iran. The analysis of previous studies on "Forest dwellers' dependence on forest resources" is insufficient. For example, the pattern of “forest dwellers’ dependence eon forest resources” can differ by continent/country (advanced vs. developing). Therefore, more intensive reviews or prior studies are required.

Response:

In addition to referring to studies in developing countries in line (78-89), the importance of addressing the issue in the forests of the central Zagros of Iran was discussed (lines 90-96).

 

2. Materials and Methods

In line 121 – 126 : “A total of 170 questionnaires were completed through personal interviews with the head of the household, and this represented 18.7% of the total population in the five studied villages. Based on Cochran’s formula, an error acceptance rate of 0.07 was recorded [26]. The content validity approach based on Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to determine the validity of the questionnaire, and the reliability of the questionnaire was computed to be 0.77. In the social survey analysis, it is necessary to explain more kindly what numerical criteria the quantitative values for 18.7%, 0.07, and 0.77 represent (mean).

Response:

Additional explanations about how to choose the sample size to complete the questionnaire were added in lines (157-165).

 

 In line 133 : I don't quite understand table 1. It means the number of households in the survey, but what does the number of questions imply? Does the No. of questionnaires mean that the survey contents are different for each village? It is stated in the abstract that 170 households were surveyed, but in the table, it is indicated as  906. Which is the right information?

Response:

As stated in the amendment to the answer to the previous comment, out of 906 rural households in the five studied villages, 170 households were selected to complete the questionnaire through interviews with the head of the households. Thus, 906 households are the total statistical population, but 170 households are the sample size.

 

3. Results

In line 216-217 : “The variables of age, household size, household income, and forest farming were positively associated with wood consumption, use of medicinal plants, and use of edible plants”

“Jo, J. H., Roh, T., Shin, S., & Youn, Y. C. (2019). Sustainable assets and strategies affecting the forestry household income: Empirical evidence from south korea. A study by Sustainability, 11(13), 3680" reports that forest household income is divided into the sum of forest income (FI), non-forestry income (NFI), and transfer income (TI). Accordingly, shouldn't we look at forest income (FI) as a target, not forest household income to define the definitions of forest dependency? What about your data? Did you also divide the forest household income into forest income (FI), non-forestry income (NFI), and transfer income (TI)?

Response:

In this study, we tried to evaluate the relationship and correlation between social and economic indicators with the dependence on the forest in the analysis of the factors affecting the type and extent of dependence of local people on forest resources. It was in this direction that we evaluated the household income index as an external variable that can affect the household's dependence on the forest. Obviously, forest income has a very direct relationship with forest dependence. Because the higher the dependence on the forest, the more the income of the forest will increase. But examining the issue of how much the total income of the household (of which the income from the forest is a part of it) affects dependency is a more important issue, because it makes it clear that the income from the forest includes a large part of the total income of the household. However, according to the opinion of the reviewer, the forest income index was added to Table 9.

 

In line 218 : Whereas education level had a negative correlation with forest dependencies. Why did this happen? There is the only presentation of results and no interpretation. Will all countries also exhibit this trend? The study mentioned above by Jo et al. (2019) showed that households with high education levels secured more transfer income (TI) such as government subsidies. Because their technology efficiency and marketing skills were better, their forest household income was higher. It is necessary to discuss your finding in more detail concerning other study’s findings.

In line 219-221 :  “This indicated that as the education level of the head of the household increases, the amount of dependence on the forest decreases.”

Why did this happen? Similarly, there is the only presentation of results and no interpretation.

Response:

In lines (375-385), the interpretation of the results and its comparison with other studies in Iran and other countries are mentioned. Also, the results of the article worked in South Korea have also been added to the discussion section (lines 357- 363).

 

In line 222 : There are no sources of Socioeconomic Indexs presented in Table 9. After the introduction section, create a Hypothesis setting step and indicate the prior studies that are the basis for the variables presented in the studies related to the subject of this study.

Response:

Section 2.5 (line 186-196) was added to the study method to introduce the factors and also the studies in which these factors have been considered.

 

4. Discussion

In line 269 – 271 : “This finding supported the study by Godoy et al. [30] who found that forest dependence increased with age of the household head, but contradicted that of Garekae et al. [35] who found that forest dependence reduced with age.  Further discussion is needed on why the difference between ages appeared based on the discussions of these previous studies. Why do you think they use more products as their age increases? In which country were the prior studies conducted? Is it because the environment and social context of which research target are more similar? Therefore, it is necessary to present the answer to these questions in the text.

 Response:

In the lines (332-345), the interpretation of the reason for the decrease in dependence on the forest in older people and its comparison with other studies was added.

 

In line 289-293 : Hegde and Enters [36] suggested that people with higher education were less livelihood dependence on forest resources. This could be explained by having a better education would lead to increase employment opportunities [30]. This finding also aligned with a study by Garekae et al. [35] who found that forest dependence had reduced with increase in education. In some countries, the higher the household managers' education level, the higher the forest household income. There are other countries where the higher the forest household income, the higher the forest dependency. In other words, both results can happen. For what reason do you think this study's country and target forests show the same results as those of Hegde and Enters [36] and Garekae et al. [35]? Discussion is needed for that reason.

Response:

The interpretation of why in the local communities of Zagros, people with higher education are less dependent on the forest (lines 378-384)

Reviewer 2 Report

As stated in the article, the authors presented results of the a survey using a descriptive analysis. However, I suggested that the authors could add some regression analysis to understand the predictors of some important variables, e.g., forest wood utilization, forest herbs, etc.

A research framework (that involves facts and hypothesis in this article, or causal model) is proposed to be included in this article. The framework will show the correlations between forest products and the socio-economic and demography of the respondents as the basis of the analysis.

I also proposed to convert the utilization of the forest products into economic value to understand better the dependence of the respondents.

Other detail and minor comments can be found in the attached paper.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Response to the comments from Reviewer #2:

 

As stated in the article, the authors presented results of the a survey using a descriptive analysis. However, I suggested that the authors could add some regression analysis to understand the predictors of some important variables, e.g., forest wood utilization, forest herbs, etc.

Response:

According to the reviewer's suggestion, regression analysis was added to the results (Table 10).

 

A research framework (that involves facts and hypothesis in this article, or causal model) is proposed to be included in this article. The framework will show the correlations between forest products and the socio-economic and demography of the respondents as the basis of the analysis.

Response:

At the end of the introduction, hypotheses and research questions have been added. In this regard, it has been tried to clarify the purpose of the research based on the proposed questions (lines 104-116).

 

I also proposed to convert the utilization of the forest products into economic value to understand better the dependence of the respondents.

Response:

In Table 3, the amount of household income from different sources of income along with the percentage of income from each is given. In this table, it has been determined that on average the households in question get their income from the forest.

 

Is there any information concerning the vegetation of the forested regions in the study area? The information can be useful for the readers coming not from the country or study site, especially concerning what type of forest products could be found.

Response:

At the end of the introduction section of the studied area, more complete information about the area was added. Including the type of forest cover (lines 131-134)

 

This figure should be under section 2.3. A conceptual framework of the research should consider facts and hypothesis. While the current figure 2 depicts the flow of data collection.

Response:

This figure should be under section 2.3. A conceptual framework of the research should consider facts and hypothesis. While the current figure 2 depicts the flow of data collection.

 

Extended or nuclear family?

Response:

It means extended family (line 298)

 

The authors also mentioned that the wood consumption associated with employment, higher income, less forest wood utilization. Any correlation? If yes, then the predictor variables of wood consumption should not stand alone. Please use regression analysis to re-check it.

Response:

According to the referee's suggestion, regression analysis was added to the results (Table 10). And at the end of the discussion, its interpretation was discussed (line 270-276).

 

Is it possible to estimate the income of the respondents from the forests (and non-forest if the data are available), based on what they collected?

Response:

In the mentioned study, the total household income was about 170 USD per month and the income from the forest was about 120 USD per month, which was added to the discussion section (lines 321-322).

 

What are the reasons?

Response:

The reason for the positive correlation between the increase and the amount of dependence on the forest was added (lines 332-334).

 

Please add more explanations on which forest products were replaced by which items.

Response:

Alternative income, including income from agricultural development and cross-border trade, which was mentioned in the aforementioned study, was added to the discussion section (Lines 356-357).

 

Can the authors please check, if there were the high educated respondents living near the forests? how dependent would they use the forest products

Response:

As shown in Table 2, 45% of the respondents are illiterate and only 8% have a bachelor's degree. All the respondents are people who live in forest villages. According to Table 9, which shows the correlation between the level of education and dependence on the forest in different forms, with the increase in the level of education, the level of dependence of people on the forest has decreased significantly. This means that people with a bachelor's degree are the least dependent on the forest. Examining the data collected from the questionnaires has shown that the only dependence of people with a bachelor's degree on the forest is the use of the forest as agricultural land which is discussed in the discussion section (lines 367-370).

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for providing the revised article. I have no further comments. 

Kind regards,