Rural Area Resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic as Exemplified by Urban–Rural Communes in Poland

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title and first sections of the article discuss the concept of rural resilience, but the empirical analysis focuses on the characteristics of the food and agricultural sector in relation to the Covid19 pandemic. This creates confusion for the reader because rural encompasses a broader scope than just the agricultural sector. Rural pertains to spatial considerations, whereas the agricultural sector is viewed from a sectoral perspective. To enhance clarity, the study should maintain consistency and establish a stronger connection between the rural and agricultural approaches.

Additionally, the authors should enrich the literature review by incorporating findings not only related to Covid19 but also to other types of external shocks such as the Great Recession of 2008 or Brexit. This broader perspective would allow for a comparative analysis of rural resilience versus urban and intermediate areas, as well as the resilience of the agricultural sector compared to other sectors of the economy. Furthermore, exploring determinants of farm resilience would enrich the discussion and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.

To enhance the study's robustness and provide more actionable insights, the authors could consider conducting cross-tabulation tests to test specific hypotheses. Currently, the study is primarily descriptive, and integrating statistical analyses would strengthen the findings and facilitate the formulation of more effective policy recommendations.

Author Response

Authors appreciate very much all remarks, general opinions and critics expressed by Reviewer 1.  We have accepted suggestions and used them for improving the manuscript.

In response to suggestions, we have made the following changes:

1. Suggestions: “To enhance clarity, the study should maintain consistency and establish a stronger connection between the rural and agricultural approaches.”

Authors’ response:

• We hope that, in its present form, the article shows more clearly the problem of resilience from the perspective of the urban-rural communes in the context of rural areas structure of the economic functions. In the article the agricultural function is considered as an element of the rural economy. The results of the research therefore lead to a confirmation of the postulate formulated in the literature on the need to strengthening multifunctionality of rural economies.
• We have developed subsection “1. Introduction” and “7. Conclusions” and enriched the literature. We have added the issues of different levels of resilience, including farm. In the 2nd subsection of the article we have developed the characteristics of rural areas and their implications for resilience.

2. Suggestions: “The authors should enrich the literature review by incorporating findings not only related to Covid19 but also to other types of external shocks such as the Great Recession of 2008 or Brexit.” “Exploring determinants of farm resilience would enrich the discussion and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.”

Authors’ response:

• In “1. Introduction” subsection we took into account, among other things, the difficulties in search for resiliency approaches, as there are limited transferable resiliency solutions to typical crises of an economic nature, such as the Great Recession of 2008.
• We have developed some determinants that affect farm resilience in subsection “7. Conclusions”.

 

3. Suggestions: “To enhance the study's robustness and provide more actionable insights, the authors could consider conducting cross-tabulation tests to test specific hypotheses.”

Authors’ response:

• In “5. Materials and Methods” subsection we have added a note: “Because the empirical part was a study/description of the entire population, the analyses did not employ statistical inference methods, instead relying on descriptive statistics.”

 

               Thank you                                                                                   

               Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper presents useful evidence on the economic resilience of rural regions in Poland.  However, I have a number of suggestions for how it could be improved:

1) There is a need for a more expansive and nuanced conceptual discussion of 'resilience' and its applications. This could be strengthened in a number of ways.  It should be noted that this is a contested concept with different ways of understanding how resilience should be understood or measured.  The Martin and Sunley reference (p1, para 2) is relevant, but it should be noted that they see 'adaptive capacity' as being key to resilience -the necessary conditions for this go beyond just stability, there need to be institutions and actors that facilitate adaptation. More could be said about the difference between a considering economic resilience at the regional level, and notions of 'community' resilience.  In addition, given the focus of the article on rural area, there could be at least a brief consideration of what makes these areas distinctive and what this means for questions of resilience.  Finally, given the focus on farms, something should be said about the relationship between resilience of individual businesses and the resilience of places or economies more broadly.

2) It would be useful to have some more context on the agriculture sector in Poland.  E.g. how important is it in the economy overall?  What type of agricultural activities?  What is the policy framework to support agriculture? 

3) Materials and Methods

- Some more information should be provide on who the respondents to the survey were.  What positions did they hold within local government? How confident can we be that they are in a good position to assess local agriculture? Related to this some more context needs to be provided to international readers on the nature and responsibilities of local government in Poland.

- Some justification should be offered for the decision to focus on 'urban-rural' communes.  This is mentioned at the start of section 6 but would be more appropriately discussed in the methods.  

- Could the surveyed communes be presented on a map? On what basis are the communes in Easter Poland categorised as 'peripheral'?  Distance from larger population centres? 

- Some clarification is required as to what is meant by 'semi-open' questions.  It would be useful to provide a copy of the questionnaire as supplementary material if possible.

4) Results

- There is a need for some clarification on what is meant by 'Production specialisation' (Table 3).  Is this something that respondents were asked to identify or based on analysis of other data at commune level?

- A minor point, but the Tables should include the total number of responses for each question.

- There should be some acknowledgement of the limitations of the study - in particular the relatively low number of responses in some of the results which makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions.

5) There should be some discussion of how these results contribute to broader understanding of resilience, beyond the specific context of rural/urban districts in Poland.  To what extent can these findings be generalised?  It would also be useful to relate the findings more explicitly to a broader range of literature, including that from economic geography such as the Martin and Sunley paper referenced earlier.

Author Response

Authors appreciate very much insightful review, all remarks and critics expressed by Reviewer 2.  We are grateful because they allowed us significantly improve manuscript. We have accepted all suggestions and used them for improving the manuscript.

In response to suggestions, we have made the following changes:

1. Suggestion 1: “There is a need for a more expansive and nuanced conceptual discussion of 'resilience' and its applications.”

Authors’ response:

• The introduction to the article has been significantly developed. We have stressed to role of institutions and actors that facilitate adaptation. Also, we have developed the issues of different levels of resilience and notions of 'community' resilience. Based on Wilson 2012 we have i.a. stated that “The implementation of pathways of resilience can only find its most direct expression at the level of the individual/household/farm and the community, as it is only at the most local level that outcomes of policies and decisions are experienced”.
• In the 2^nd subsection of the article we have developed the characteristics of rural areas and their implications for resilience.

2. Suggestion 2: “It would be useful to have some more context on the agriculture sector in Poland. E.g. how important is it in the economy overall?  What type of agricultural activities?  What is the policy framework to support agriculture?.”

Authors’ response:

• We have introduced subsection “6.1. Agriculture sector in Poland”.

3. Suggestions concerned “Materials and Methods” subsection.

Authors’ response:

In subsection “6.2. Characteristics of the agriculture sector in selected urban-rural communes” we have provided information on the status of the local government in Poland.

In the subsection “5. Materials and Methods”:

• We have added information: “The selection of urban-rural communes for the study was conditioned by the intention to capture the role of small towns in the processes of local development taking into account its links with the surrounding rural areas.”
• We have presented surveyed communes on a map.
• We stated “In this study, peripheral municipalities are defined as those located in the Eastern Poland Macroregion.”
• We have explained that “In the semi-open questions, respondents were able to provide, for example, examples or to elaborate on the answer indicated in the survey questionnaire.”

4. Suggestions concerned “6. Results” subsection.

• A note is inserted under table 3: “*respondents indicated one answer from the seven available choices based on their own assessment/knowledge of the development of local economic sectors”.
• We have added the total number of responses for each question in the tables and notes under the tables.

5. Suggestions concerned “5) There should be some discussion of how these results contribute to broader understanding of resilience, beyond the specific context of rural/urban districts in Poland. To what extent can these findings be generalised? It would also be useful to relate the findings more explicitly to a broader range of literature, including that from economic geography such as the Martin and Sunley paper referenced earlier.”

Authors’ response:

• We have developed “7. Conclusions” subsection and enriched the literature.

 

               Thank you                                                                                   

               Authors

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed the comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you to the authors for their diligence in responding to earlier feedback, the paper has been significantly improved and I am happy to recommend its acceptance.