Determinants of Smallholder Farmers’ Decisions to Use Multiple Climate-Smart Agricultural Technologies in North Wello Zone, Northern Ethiopia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsGiven that agricultural decisions tend to be uneven across smallholder farmers in Ethiopia, these authors wish to determine how decisions influence adoption of Climate-Smart Agricultural (CSA) practices, which are themselves variable in light of farm size, family size, geographical location, ecological conditions, and a variety of other factors. They discuss multiple variables associated with CSA adoption, particularly focusing on the one region in Northern Ethiopia that has experienced famine in recent years and where smallholders could have adopted more CSA practices that might have prevented or moderated the crisis.
The paper is highly detailed regarding conclusions from the three regions examined and presents a number of findings that are both interesting and potentially useful to the region’s agroecology and agricultural economy, which are related to the health and well-being of the population of the region. Perhaps most importantly, farmers who use one CSA practice are likely to adopt others that complement one another, although there are a number of institutional and structural barriers to adoption of CSA practices. The latter point is not particularly new, but clearly is part of the context of introducing CSA practices in regions prone to immediate climate-change problems.
The authors devote attention to water retention—water harvesting and agroforestry in particular—and the complementarity between these practices is promising. Nevertheless, as seen in Figure 2, relatively small percentages of farmers in three regions practice these methods. I imagine that low adoption of these practices derives from institutional and structural barriers rather than individual decisions. While level of education seems positively associated with CSA practices, small farmers often develop knowledge systems based on observation and repeated experimentation on their lands that are not dependent on literacy or formal education. Innovation adoption is more often the result of information sharing among people from similar social and cultural backgrounds rather than exogenous factors. I wonder whether the authors considered this.
Author Response
Thank you for thorough review
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper analyzes the factors influencing the application of CSA by constructing a multivariate probit model, which is useful for the promotion of CSA in Ethiopia, and it will be more helpful for the publication of the article if the following can be improved.
1. The gaps in the sentences before and after the article are too big in many places. It is recommended that the authors check the format of the article again and make adjustments.
2. the conclusion of the article is too long and there is no subheading. It is suggested that the author should adjust the layout of the article or add subheadings to make it more convenient to read and express opinions.
3. The content of the article is related to CSA, but the definition of CSA is not clearly given in the first half of the article. It is recommended that the authors give a clear definition of CSA at the beginning of the article while citing a lot of literature.
4. The article examines and makes recommendations on CSA in Ethiopia, but the policy recommendations are short, simple and not professionally relevant to the promotion and popularization of CSA. It is recommended that the authors reconsider the policy recommendations given.
5. There are a lot of unclear sentences in the article. It is recommended that the authors carefully consider the sentence formulation and make some changes. In particular, the following sentences should be revised and improved:
（1）Temperature and extreme weather-related events are increasing, but the rainfall pattern in terms of its amountand distribution are unreliable in Ethiopia.
The sentence is unclear and it is not clear what the author is trying to say. It is recommended that the author reword the sentence, for example, replacing "unreliable" with "unpredictable", and reorganizing the logic of the sentence to make the point more accurately.
（2）Ethiopia's economy is heavily reliant on agriculture, contributing 42–45 percent to gross domestic product (GDP), 90 percent of exports, and employs more than 80 percent of the population.
In this sentence, it is suggested that the word "employ" be replaced to make the point clearer.
（3）The CSA practices do not have to be novel; however, any practices that contribute to
food security, ecosystem resilience, and carbon sinks are considered climate-smart.
What contributes to carbon sinks is that the author is advised to clear up the logic and retouch it.
（4）The smartness of CSA practices is determined by the context in which they are applied (Sova et al. 2018). Ethiopian smallholder farmers have implemented several CSA practices, primarily to boost their farmland productivity and crop production, (Eshete et al.2020; Jirata et al., 2016). However, due to differences in so-cioeconomic, plot, institutional, and social factors, the implementation of CSA practicesvaried among smallholder farmers in most developing countries including Ethiopia.
What does it mean that the smartness of CSA depends on the context in which it is applied? Is there any causal relationship between this and the implementation of CSA by Ethiopian farmers?
（5）Due to the great relief differences,anthropogenic activities have led to extensive degradation.
Poorly articulated, what has been degraded as a result of human activity? Does it have anything to do with topographical differences?
（6）The most common practices implemented in the study area were improved crop varieties (Pest resistance, high yielding, tolerant to drought, short season),crop diversification, agroforestry, minimum tillage, small-scale irrigation, rainwater harvesting, efficient use of inorganic and organic fertilizers (Table 2)
What is this sentence trying to say?
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThis paper analyzes the factors influencing the application of CSA by constructing a multivariate probit model, which is useful for the promotion of CSA in Ethiopia, and it will be more helpful for the publication of the article if the following can be improved.
1. The gaps in the sentences before and after the article are too big in many places. It is recommended that the authors check the format of the article again and make adjustments.
2. the conclusion of the article is too long and there is no subheading. It is suggested that the author should adjust the layout of the article or add subheadings to make it more convenient to read and express opinions.
3. The content of the article is related to CSA, but the definition of CSA is not clearly given in the first half of the article. It is recommended that the authors give a clear definition of CSA at the beginning of the article while citing a lot of literature.
4. The article examines and makes recommendations on CSA in Ethiopia, but the policy recommendations are short, simple and not professionally relevant to the promotion and popularization of CSA. It is recommended that the authors reconsider the policy recommendations given.
5. There are a lot of unclear sentences in the article. It is recommended that the authors carefully consider the sentence formulation and make some changes. In particular, the following sentences should be revised and improved:
（1）Temperature and extreme weather-related events are increasing, but the rainfall pattern in terms of its amountand distribution are unreliable in Ethiopia.
The sentence is unclear and it is not clear what the author is trying to say. It is recommended that the author reword the sentence, for example, replacing "unreliable" with "unpredictable", and reorganizing the logic of the sentence to make the point more accurately.
（2）Ethiopia's economy is heavily reliant on agriculture, contributing 42–45 percent to gross domestic product (GDP), 90 percent of exports, and employs more than 80 percent of the population.
In this sentence, it is suggested that the word "employ" be replaced to make the point clearer.
（3）The CSA practices do not have to be novel; however, any practices that contribute to
food security, ecosystem resilience, and carbon sinks are considered climate-smart.
What contributes to carbon sinks is that the author is advised to clear up the logic and retouch it.
（4）The smartness of CSA practices is determined by the context in which they are applied (Sova et al. 2018). Ethiopian smallholder farmers have implemented several CSA practices, primarily to boost their farmland productivity and crop production, (Eshete et al.2020; Jirata et al., 2016). However, due to differences in so-cioeconomic, plot, institutional, and social factors, the implementation of CSA practicesvaried among smallholder farmers in most developing countries including Ethiopia.
What does it mean that the smartness of CSA depends on the context in which it is applied? Is there any causal relationship between this and the implementation of CSA by Ethiopian farmers?
（5）Due to the great relief differences,anthropogenic activities have led to extensive degradation.
Poorly articulated, what has been degraded as a result of human activity? Does it have anything to do with topographical differences?
（6）The most common practices implemented in the study area were improved crop varieties (Pest resistance, high yielding, tolerant to drought, short season),crop diversification, agroforestry, minimum tillage, small-scale irrigation, rainwater harvesting, efficient use of inorganic and organic fertilizers (Table 2)
What is this sentence trying to say?
Author Response
thanks you for your thorough review
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSPECIFIC COMMENTS
Abstract
No comment
Keywords
I suggest that the authors eliminate the keywords multiple climate-smart agriculture, smallholder farmers and North Wello Zone, which are in the title. Instead, I suggest the keywords climate-smart agriculture, practices adoption, multivariate probit model, econometric models, rain-fed agriculture.
1. Introduction
No comment
2. Research Methodology
The abbreviations of some explanatory variables and CSA practices included in the manuscript are not uniform. I suggest that authors review and use the same abbreviations for all variables noted in the text and in the tables.
Table 1, page 5. Align the number 7,385 with the Total HH column
What are kebeles? Are they administrative territorial units? Please clarify in the manuscript.
Table 2, page 7. What does DAP mean?
On Line 268, page 8 it says: “…using an ordered probit modeling technique.” I suggest writing: “…using an ordered probit modeling (OPM) technique.”
3. Results
On Line 61, page 13 it says: “Results of the MVP and OPR models are presented…” I suggest that the authors write “Results of the MVP and OPM models are presented…”
The title of Table 3 (line 84, page 13) is repeated. The first title is presented on page 9 and the second on pages 13-14. Authors should correct and renumber subsequent table titles and their in-text citations.
Line 104, (page 14). I suggest that the authors modify the title of section 3.4.3 Factors Affecting the Decisions to Use Different CSA Technologies. I suggest that the authors write: Demographic and Social Factors Affecting the Decisions to Use Different CSA Technologies
Table 4, line 130, page 15: The title of the Table says: “Table 4. Estimated coefficients of the ordered probit model”. I suggest changing it to: “Table 4. Estimated coefficients of the ordered probit model (OPM)”
Table 4, (page 15), what does the ADD variable mean?
Lines 166-167: The statement “Cropland rent with others had a negative and significant relationship with the decision to use inorganic fertilizers…” is contradicted by what is noted in lines 162-164: “Cropland rent for crop share purposes was linked to improved crop variety (P 0.05), organic fertilizer and irrigation practices (p 0.1), agroforestry, rainwater harvesting, and inorganic (chemical) fertilizers…”. I suggest that the authors review and, if necessary, correct this statement.
Table 5, (page 17), what does the ADR variable mean?
Table 5, (page 18), in the Institutional and infrastructural-related factors subcategory, the Explanatory variable Distance from home to extension is repeated. The authors must correct the second repeated variable, which must be Distance from home to market.
In Table 5 (pages 17-18) the explanatory variables are grouped into different subcategories, but these subcategories are not used in other Tables in which these variables are included. Therefore, I suggest that in the same way as in Table 5, the authors group the explanatory variables in Table 3 (pages 9-10) and in Table 4 (page 15) using the same subcategories of Table 5.
4. Discussion
No comment
5. Conclusion and Policy Implication
No comment
Endnotes
The endnote with the superscript 2Timad (line 289) is not cited in the text. Please review and correct.
References
Citations in the text are presented by author and year, while in the references section they are written and arranged in numerical and alphabetical order by author. Therefore, I recommend that authors cite references in the text using the numerical system and verify the correspondence of citations in the text with the corresponding numbers in the references section.
Please that authors review the writing of Reference 28, and review the list of names of the authors of references 80 and 83.
Author Response
thank you for your thorough review
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
