Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessArticle

Peer-Review Record

Evaluation of Sustainable Development Policy of Sichuan Citrus Industry in China Based on DEA–Malmquist Index and DID Model

Sustainability 2023, 15(5), 4260; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054260

by Yu He and Wenkuan Chen^*

Reviewer 1:

Dragan Cockalo

Reviewer 2:

Mirpouya Mirmozaffari

Sustainability 2023, 15(5), 4260; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054260

Submission received: 19 January 2023 / Revised: 21 February 2023 / Accepted: 23 February 2023 / Published: 27 February 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This text, like a good part of other manuscripts that I have had the opportunity to look at recently, suffers from the same problem - it is methodologically unfounded. The purpose of the research, goals, hypotheses, as well as the expected results and benefits that can be realized are unclear. I think that already in the abstract it is necessary to emphasize the originality of the research, and also point out its possible shortcomings and limitations. The only thing explained is the mathematical apparatus, which should be clear already, because, as far as I understand, the authors use the proven DEA methodology and use the known settings of the DID model - they do not introduce anything new in this sense, but use the existing known apparatus.

There are twenty-eight references in the literature database, which is neither good nor bad, but I think that: literary sources should be more recent - the average is over 20 years old, and the oldest I have seen is from 1953, and then there should be more literary sources , because it is impossible for the development of this topic to stop or not to be investigated further, while this paper is available. A very unusual way of citing literature is used in the text, as well as at the end of the manuscript, which I think is not in accordance with the requirements of the journal and the publisher.

Otherwise, I found the text interesting and traceable to read.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Professor,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of the manuscript “Evaluation of Sustainable Development Policy of Sichuan Citrus Industry in China——Based on DEA-Malmquist index and DID model” for publication in the Sustainability. We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated all your suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are marked in red and highlighted in the manuscript. Please see below, in red, for a point-by-point response to the reviewers’comments and concerns. All page numbers refer to the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.

Point 1: it is methodologically unfounded.

Response 1: Thank you for your comments. In the second part of the paper, lines 169-221, a section is added -- introducing models or methods used in policy evaluation, focusing on the analysis of the scope of application and deficiencies of DEA and DID, and minimizing the possibility of such deficiencies through the selection of indicators and grouping of research objects in the empirical analysis. At the same time, in the first part of the article, a paragraph is added, line 127-137, explaining the rationality and value of the two methods.

Point 2: The purpose of the research, goals, hypotheses, as well as the expected results and benefits that can be realized are unclear.

Response 2: Thank you for your comments. In the "introduction" part of the paper, the purpose of the research is rewritten, which is specifically reflected in lines 79-111, and the research objectives and expected results are introduced in lines 112-127.

Point 3: I think that already in the abstract it is necessary to emphasize the originality of the research, and also point out its possible shortcomings and limitations.

Response 3: Thank you for your comments. The content added in lines 93-111 of the new paper reflects the originality of the research. In view of the deficiencies and limitations of the research, in lines 665-676, the paper analyzes the limitation of the time range of the research, the influence of the changes of Chinese consumers' "online" shopping habits and the age structure of orange farmers on the citrus industry, and the diversification of research methods. On this basis, the corresponding research prospects are put forward.

Point 4: The only thing explained is the mathematical apparatus, which should be clear already, because, as far as I understand, the authors use the proven DEA methodology and use the known settings of the DID model - they do not introduce anything new in this sense, but use the existing known apparatus.

Response 4: Thank you for your comments. Unfortunately, according to our current research level, there is no way to innovate in the improvement of the model. We can only strictly follow the requirements of the two models in terms of the relationship between the number of samples, indicators and decision units, so as to truly reflect the situation of Sichuan citrus industry and avoid invalid evaluation results due to insufficient sample size, excessive number of indicators and other reasons. At the same time, the existing research results mainly use one of these two models, and the paper integrates the two models, hoping to provide a useful attempt and reference for further research.

Point 5: There are twenty-eight references in the literature database, which is neither good nor bad, but I think that: literary sources should be more recent - the average is over 20 years old, and the oldest I have seen is from 1953, and then there should be more literary sources , because it is impossible for the development of this topic to stop or not to be investigated further, while this paper is available. A very unusual way of citing literature is used in the text, as well as at the end of the manuscript, which I think is not in accordance with the requirements of the journal and the publisher.

Response 5: Thank you for your comments. After our modification, the number of references has increased to 51, among which, the old literatures without reference value have been removed, and a number of high-quality literatures related to the research content of the article have been added and published in the recent 5 years, especially the recent 3 years. Based on the format requirements of reference journals, all references have been rewritten in accordance with your opinions, hoping to meet the requirements of journals and publishers.

Point 6: Otherwise, I found the text interesting and traceable to read.

Response 6: Thank you for your approval of this article. Since the article has been substantially revised and rewritten, in order to save your time, our revised manuscript adopts the format of "revised" to retain all traces of modification. The darker red is the content that has been rewritten or revised, while the lighter red is the content that has been retouched in English by a professional retouching agency. Please review it.

Once again, we thank you for the time you put in reviewing our paper and look forward to meeting your expectations. Since your inputs have been precious, in the eventuality of a publication, we would like to acknowledge your contribution explicitly.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper studies Evaluation of Sustainable Development Policy of Sichuan Citrus Industry in China—Based on DEA-Malmquist index and DID model. Some weaknesses should be addressed in this paper. Therefore, I suggest the authors resubmit it after a major revision. My suggestions are as follows:

1. Discuss the study's limitations and future research suggestions.

2. I strongly suggest that the paper be proofread and reread meticulously again, particularly regarding the spelling and grammatical mistakes.

3. Flowchart is beneficial; it’s also important to outline the methodology behind this new approach. Please consider a flowchart of your suggested approach at the beginning of your paper.

4. Please outline the structure of your paper at the end of the introduction with more details.

5. I suggest that you update section 3.2 (data source) so that the illustration used in the methodology section should be more readable.

6. All equations are like pictures. Please increase the quality of the formula.

7. It is necessary to include additional information for the results part. You just consider some figures and tables without any explanations among them.

8. Following the mathematical model is difficult due to many notational mistakes.

9. What is your mean in lines 243-245 by mentioning “Scholar Ma Huilan (2007) used the index model of comparative advantage in scale and efficiency to analyze the regional differences in China's cotton production comparative advantage and export competitiveness

What is your mean by saying competitiveness? What is your strategy by mentioning this word? Clarify more? I have not seen this word in DEA tools and applications.

10. All figures are blurred and invisible like a picture. Please improve the quality of figures

11. To improve your related works, consider the following DEA high-quality papers in your literature review which consider applying DEA in other case studies:

- Analysis of the Productivity Dynamics of Electricity Distribution Regions in Ghana. Energies. 2022 Dec 12;15(24):9414.

- Assessing rice production efficiency for food security policy planning in Malaysia: A non-parametric bootstrap data envelopment analysis approach. Food Policy. 2022 Feb 1; 107:102208.

- Haider S, Danish MS, Sharma R. Assessing energy efficiency of Indian paper industry and influencing factors: A slack-based firm-level analysis. Energy Economics. 2019 Jun 1;81:454-64.

- A data-envelopment analysis-based systematic review of the literature on innovation performance. Heliyon. 2022 Nov 30:e11925.

-Fiscal Expenditure Efficiency Measurement and Its Convergence Analysis on Aging Undertakings in China: Based on a Global Super-Efficiency Slacks-Based Measure Model. Sustainability. 2023 Jan;15(3):2486.

- A novel machine learning approach combined with optimization models for eco-efficiency evaluation. Applied Sciences. 2020 Jul 28;10(15):5210.

- A novel artificial intelligent approach: Comparison of machine learning tools and algorithms based on optimization DEA Malmquist productivity index for eco-efficiency evaluation. International Journal of Energy Sector Management. 2021 Mar 22.

- An application of PCA-DEA with the double-bootstrap approach to estimate the technical efficiency of New Zealand District Health Boards. Health Economics, Policy and Law. 2022 Apr;17(2):175-99.

- Evaluation of Technical Efficiency in Exotic Carp Polyculture in Northern India: Conventional DEA vs. Bootstrapping Methods. Fishes. 2022 Jul 14;7(4):168.

- Developing a novel integrated generalised data envelopment analysis (DEA) to evaluate hospitals providing stroke care services. Bioengineering. 2021 Dec 10;8(12):207.

- Employing DEA for Assessment of Cruise Market: A Case Study in Malaga—Spanish Port. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2022 Nov 22;10(12):1805.

- A novel hybrid parametric and non-parametric optimisation model for average technical efficiency assessment in public hospitals during and post-COVID-19 pandemic. Bioengineering. 2021 Dec 27;9(1):7.

- Evaluation of green logistics efficiency in Jiangxi Province based on Three-Stage DEA from the perspective of high-quality development. Sustainability. 2022 Jan 11;14(2):797.

- An integrated artificial intelligence model for efficiency assessment in pharmaceutical companies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainable Operations and Computers. 2022 Jan 1;3:156-67.

- Third-party logistics efficiency: an innovative two-stage DEA analysis of the French market. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications. 2021 Nov 2;24(6):581-604.

- VCS and CVS: New combined parametric and non-parametric operation research models. Sustainable Operations and Computers. 2021 Jan 1;2:36-56.

- Tachega MA, Yao X, Liu Y, Ahmed D, Li H, Mintah C. Energy efficiency evaluation of oil producing economies in Africa: DEA, malmquist and multiple regression approaches. Cleaner environmental systems. 2021 Jun 1;2:100025.

- Exploring the spatial network structure of agricultural water use efficiency in China: A social network perspective. Sustainability. 2022 Feb 24;14(5):2668.

- Temporal and Spatial Differentiation and Driving Factors of China’s Agricultural Eco-Efficiency Considering Agricultural Carbon Sinks. Agriculture. 2022 Oct 19;12(10):1726.

In conclusion, this version is unacceptable and needs to apply all the suggested comments point by point to improve the quality of your paper.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Professor,

Point 1: Discuss the study's limitations and future research suggestions.

Response 1: Thank you for your comments. In view of the deficiencies and limitations of the research, in the 665-676 lines of the new paper, from the limitations of the time range of the research, the changes of Chinese consumers' online shopping habits and the changes of the age structure of orange farmers on the citrus industry, the impact of the diversification of research methods, and on this basis, the corresponding research prospects are put forward.

Point 2: I strongly suggest that the paper be proofread and reread meticulously again, particularly regarding the spelling and grammatical mistakes.

Response 2: We are very sorry to delay your time due to our lack of English. During the revision process, we enlisted the help of a professional English polishing agency to correct a large number of spelling and grammar errors, which are reflected in the lighter red highlights in the article. The certificate is uploaded in the form of attachment, please check it.

Point 3: Flowchart is beneficial; it’s also important to outline the methodology behind this new approach. Please consider a flowchart of your suggested approach at the beginning of your paper.

Response 3: Thank you for your comments. In the second part of the new paper, lines 169-221, a section is added -- comparing and introducing various models or methods used in policy evaluation in the form of a table, focusing on the analysis of the scope of application and deficiencies of DEA and DID, and minimizing the possibility of such deficiencies through the selection of indicators and grouping of research objects in the empirical analysis. At the same time, in the first part of the article, a paragraph is added, line 127-137, explaining the rationality and value of the two methods.

Point 4: Please outline the structure of your paper at the end of the introduction with more details.

Response 4: Thank you for your comments. An introduction to the structure of the paper has been added to lines 159-166 of the new paper.

Point 5: I suggest that you update section 3.2 (data source) so that the illustration used in the methodology section should be more readable.

Response 5: Thank you for your comments. Section 3.2 of the new paper has been rewritten. Lines 391-410 show all the sources of data used in the efficiency and effect evaluation, and provide a necessary introduction to the grouping in the effect evaluation.

Point 6: All equations are like pictures. Please increase the quality of the formula.

Response 6: Thank you for your comments. We used the formula editor to format all the equations, hoping to increase the clarity of the equations.

Point 7: It is necessary to include additional information for the results part. You just consider some figures and tables without any explanations among them.

Response 7: Thank you for your comments. In the fourth part of the paper: the conclusion, we re-write to solve the problem of insufficient explanation. Part 4.1.1,”Mean change and decomposition of citrus total factor productivity in Sichuan cities and prefectures”,lines 424-457, explains the results of the new Table 5 in three ways. Part 4.1.2, “Time value changes of citrus total factor productivity in Sichuan cities and prefectures”,lines 460-497, explains the results of the new Table 6 in two points.

Point 8: Following the mathematical model is difficult due to many notational mistakes.

Response 8: Thank you for your comments. We used the formula editor to edit all the equations and symbols and corrected the original errors.

Point 9: What is your mean in lines 243-245 by mentioning “Scholar Ma Huilan (2007) used the index model of comparative advantage in scale and efficiency to analyze the regional differences in China's cotton production comparative advantage and export competitiveness

Response 9: Thank you for your comments. We apologize for the misunderstanding caused by our improper expression. In the study of Ma Huilan and other scholars, the competitiveness evaluation of agricultural industry is realized through the comparative advantage index model. In addition to the scale and efficiency comparative advantage indexes, there are also explicit comparative advantage indexes for analyzing the export of agricultural products. These models only involve the scale and efficiency comparative advantage indexes in this study. Meanwhile, in the studies of scholars such as Ma Huilan and Qi Chunjie, the above models are only used to analyze the comparative advantage of agricultural industry, which has nothing to do with DEA model. They are not the contents and methods of DEA model. In the 368-371 lines of the new paper, this part of content is rewritten, ambiguous expressions are deleted, and the research results of scholars such as Ma Huilan and Qi Qingchun are quoted in a standard way, which is reflected in the references [47] and [48].

Point 10: All figures are blurred and invisible like a picture. Please improve the quality of figures

Response 10: Thank you for your comments. We used the picture editor to redraw Figures 1 and 2 and improve the sharpness of the images.

Point 11: To improve your related works, consider the following DEA high-quality papers in your literature review which consider applying DEA in other case studies:

Response 11: Thank you for your guidance. After our modification, the number of references has increased to 51, among which, the old literatures without reference value have been removed, and a number of high-quality literatures related to the research content of the paper and published in the recent 5 years, especially in the recent 3 years have been added, including many high-quality papers on DEA mentioned by you. Based on the format requirements of reference journals, all the references are rewritten in order to meet the requirements of journals and publishers.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors, thank you for accepting my suggestions... for the most part.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Professor,

Point 1: Are all the cited references relevant to the research?

Response 1: Thank you for your comments. We rewrote the literature review part and listed it as the second part of the paper. Among them, the literature with little correlation with the content of this study is eliminated, and a number of references on DEA application fields and model comparison are added, hoping to enhance the relevance of references.

Point 2: Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

Response 2: Thank you for your comments. In order to more clearly show the idea and design of this research, we have added a flow chart in the first part of the paper to present the research questions, research steps, research methods and other contents. Please refer to the 83-84 lines of the new paper, Figure 1 Flowchart of sustainable development policy evaluation of Sichuan citrus industry.

Point 3: Is the article adequately referenced?

Response 3: Thank you for your comments. We have added a number of new references in terms of research methods, model application fields and specific model selection, hoping to present a more extensive and in-depth reference effect and better absorb the advantages of existing research.

Point 4: Dear authors, thank you for accepting my suggestions... for the most part.

Response 4: Dear professor, thank you for your recognition and support of our work. Your encouragement has greatly enhanced our confidence to continue our research. It is expected that the policy evaluation of sustainable development of Sichuan citrus industry in China will be paid more attention by more scholars. Thank you again for your affirmation.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

I just want to remind my comments bellow:

This paper studies the Evaluation of the Sustainable Development Policy of the Sichuan Citrus 2 Industry in China—Based on the DEA-Malmquist index and DID model. Some weaknesses should be addressed in this paper. Therefore, I suggest the authors resubmit it after a major revision. My suggestions are as follows: