Study on the Affecting Factors of Land Circulation in Minority Areas of Ledong County, Hainan Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have carried out investigation on the study on: Farmers’ willingness to circulate land in minority areas of Ledong County, Hainan Province, China, the article is very interesting to the large audience and before acceptance the following Minor comments should be addressed.

Title: 1. Please rewrite the title in accordance with the theme of the paper.

Abstract: 1. Please avoid using abbreviations in the Abstract or use abbreviations with full form, mention it first time, then abbreviations can be used.

2. Please report the findings in the abstract, what is the enhancement?

Introduction: please check the grammar, typos throughout the introduction section, check the similarity index in the introduction section.

1. Please clearly add the Novelty statement at the end of the introduction section. Please add why the study is important and what are the outcomes of the study.

Material and Methodology:

1. Please add the standard deviation and uncertainty analysis of the study. Add better version of Figure 1.

2. Take care of subscripts and superscripts in Tables and abbreviations.

Results and discussion

1. Please improve the overall R and D section, please add previous studies to support your claims.  

2. Add few more results, since the articles looks like a case study which is suitable in SSCI.

Conclusion:

Please check the future scope and add relevance of the study, it will be better if you can add the conclusion in points for better understanding.

Author Response

请参阅附件。

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you very much for the interesting work. The present manuscript have to re-write again, for example, the structure, writing manner. Here I list some major comments an requested the authors have to carefully revised the manuscript.

1. Most of the information in the first section (Introduction) is not cited.  That is a very severe problem. Details are in the attach file.

2. Line 127: Where and when did you obtain these data?

3. Line 136: more photos needed here, i.e. on the field surveys, or something.

4. Line 140: You repeat it again here with a different amount.

5. Line 145: What is the unit using here?

6. Line 193: It is difficult to see the numbers here, Bar plot is much better.

7. Line 2009: Where? because you mentioned the questionnaire survey but you never show it in the paper.

8. Line 230-248: Same to here. Bar plot or something similar is much better here

9. Line 384: Why it is here? Not in the Method section?

10. Line 430: Where is this? could not find this Table 4-3

11. The author put numbers in every single paragraph. It is weird. The writing manner here is somehow strange, it should be paragraphs without numbers.

12. Attach questionnaire forms?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The revised version is much better than the previous one. I think it is ready for publication on Sustainability.