The Impact of Digital Inclusive Finance on the Sustainable Growth of Income of Herdsmen in China’s Pastoral Areas
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an interesting study and it is well organized, however still needs improvement before consider for publication.
1) Please improve contribution of the study at the end of the introduction part.
2) Improve quality of the Figure 1.
3) Compare your results with previous studies.
4) Add limitations of the study at the end of the conclusion
Comments on the Quality of English Language
No any comment
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript. Those constructive comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. And "Track Changes" function and highlighting function are both used for all corrections in the manuscript. For accurate answer, we separated the report into several comments, and replied each comment respectively.
Manuscript ID:3140845
Comment 1: Please improve contribution of the study at the end of the introduction part.
Authors’ Response: Thank you for your feedback and suggestions on our introduction. We are very grateful for your insightful comments and suggestions. In response to your recommendation, we have enhanced the contribution of our study by adding a new paragraph at the end of the introduction part, which thoroughly outlines the unique contributions and significant implications of our research. We believe that this addition will provide a clearer perspective on the value and impact of our work.
Comment 2: Improve quality of the Figure 1.
Authors’ Response: We greatly appreciate your feedback on the quality of figure 1. In response to your suggestion, we have meticulously revised and enhanced the resolution and clarity of figure 1 to improve its overall quality. We are confident that these improvements will aid in the better visualization and understanding of our results. Thank you for your attention to this detail and for your valuable input towards improving our manuscript.
Comment 3: Compare your results with previous studies.
Authors’ Response: We are extremely grateful for your insightful suggestion to compare our results with those of previous studies. In response, we have incorporated a detailed comparison that highlights the distinctiveness of our findings compared to prior research focused on the internet and income inequality. This has been added to the conclusion of our paper, just before the policy recommendations. Thank you for guiding us to strengthen the relevance and significance of our work through this comparative analysis.
Comment 4: Add limitations of the study at the end of the conclusion.
Authors’ Response: We are truly grateful for your constructive suggestion to add the limitations of our study. Following your advice, we have included a paragraph on the limitations of our research at the end of the conclusion. This section highlights that our study utilizes regional data on digital inclusive finance and the average income of herdsmen as explanatory and response variables, respectively, to elucidate the impact of digital inclusive finance development on herdsmen's income. A limitation of our study is that it does not examine the effects of inclusive finance development from the perspective of individual herding households, which warrants further investigation using micro-level data from herdsmen households. Thank you for helping us enhance the critical evaluation of our work through the acknowledgment of its limitations.
We are deeply grateful for the reviewer's meticulous examination and valuable feedback on our work. We have incorporated your suggestions to enhance the analytical depth and reflective nature of our paper, effectively addressing the concerns raised. Thank you once again for your careful review and constructive recommendations, which have significantly contributed to the integrity and depth of our research.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe Authors present a study of the impact of digital financial inclusion on the income of herdsmen in ethnic minority regions using panel data models from nine major pastoral provinces in China from 2011 to 2022. Data for the research are obtained from the "China Statistical Yearbook" and the "China Rural Statistical Yearbook" spanning the years 2012 to 2023. Authors to counteract the effects of heteroscedasticity in the dataset, a logarithmic transformation was applied to certain variables. The Authors put forward four hypotheses: (H1): digital inclusive finance positively impacts the income level of farmers; (H2): digital inclusive finance enhances farmers' income by elevating the regional per capita economic development level; (H3): digital inclusive finance boosts farmers' income by farmers' entrepreneurial and employment behavior, raising wage-based income; (H4): digital inclusive finance augments farmers' income by fostering the upgrading of agricultural industrial structure. To verify them used the classic Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), random effects, and fixed effects models. The research findings indicate that digital financial inclusion has a positive impact on the income of herdsmen in ethnic minority regions. Mediating effect analysis reveals that digital financial inclusion can boost economic development in ethnic minority regions by increasing wage income, raising per capita GDP levels, and promoting industrial structure upgrading. This, in turn, leads to an improvement in the income of herdsmen in these regions.
The study is interesting, with relevant data and interesting conclusions. However, the Authors did not avoid errors that should be corrected.
I have following observation and remarks. The comments mainly relate to technical preparation. I encourage Authors to address them.
The first remark concerns the literature references in the text. They are not uniformly. For example in text in line 38 (Abdalwali L, Manaf A, Hamed M A, et al., 2021; J. P M, 2022) or 42 and 43 (Valentina V, et al., 2021; Maty K, Korku G T, 2022; Josephine K, C. A L, Fan L, 2022) initials are given. In turn, in the verse74 (Li Mingliang, Li Jin, Kong Rong, et al., 2024) and 79 (Gu Ning, Wang Haowei, 2021) contains full names.
The authors also made part of the References carelessly. Please for example compare items 1, 14 and 31. And the instructions for authors include the following indication:
“References should be described as follows, depending on the type of work:
Journal Articles: 1. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.
Books and Book Chapters: 2. Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Book Title, 3rd ed.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; pp. 154–196.
Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; Volume 3, pp. 154–196. …”
According to these instructions the Authors should make recalls.
Secondly, in the content of the work sentences start with a lowercase letter. Here are just a few examples: in lines 95,109,125, 129 141 and 450 is “. digital inclusive finance …”
The lower case letter is also found in the chepter 4.1.2. dimensional analysis.
This observation also applies to Tables 1 and 2.
In addition, in the content of the work, spaces are missing in many places e.g. in Table 1 Level of economic development(RGDP).
Lastly, for the variables listed in Table 1, there are missing units, e.g. it is not known in what currency and amount the income of farms is. The same applies to Intermediary variable Wage income of farmers (WI).
Authors should also consider adding a short note at the end of the Introduction section about the layout and content of the article.
In addition, Authors may consider adding a discussion, because there is none in the work.
I think that the work is interesting, but that the manuscript do need to be refined.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript. Those constructive comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. And "Track Changes" function and highlighting function are both used for all corrections in the manuscript. For accurate answer, we separated the report into several comments, and replied each comment respectively.
Manuscript ID:3140845
Comment 1: The first remark concerns the literature references in the text. They are not uniformly. For example in text in line 38 (Abdalwali L, Manaf A, Hamed M A, et al., 2021; J. P M, 2022) or 42 and 43 (Valentina V, et al., 2021; Maty K, Korku G T, 2022; Josephine K, C. A L, Fan L, 2022) initials are given. In turn, in the verse74 (Li Mingliang, Li Jin, Kong Rong, et al., 2024) and 79 (Gu Ning, Wang Haowei, 2021) contains full names.
Authors’ Response: We greatly appreciate your meticulous attention to detail regarding the consistency of literature references in our manuscript. We have thoroughly reviewed and revised the text to ensure uniformity in citation format throughout the document. All author names are now consistently presented with initials only, following the guidelines set forth in our reference style. Thank you for this invaluable feedback, as it has helped us enhance the overall presentation and academic rigor of our work.
Comment 2: The authors also made part of the References carelessly. Please for example compare items 1, 14 and 31. And the instructions for authors include the following indication:
References should be described as follows, depending on the type of work:
Journal Articles: 1. Author 1, A.B.; Author 2, C.D. Title of the article. Abbreviated Journal Name Year, Volume, page range.
Books and Book Chapters: 2. Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Book Title, 3rd ed.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; pp. 154–196.
Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, Year; Volume 3, pp. 154–196. …”
According to these instructions the Authors should make recalls.
Authors’ Response: We are sincerely grateful for your careful attention to the accuracy and consistency of our references. In response to your feedback, we have meticulously reviewed and revised all references in our manuscript to conform to the specified reference style guidelines provided in the author instructions. Each reference has been thoroughly checked and corrected to ensure it is properly formatted according to the type of work. We are particularly thankful for your patience and detailed examples on how to cite references correctly. Your careful revision suggestions have been invaluable, and we greatly appreciate your assistance in elevating the scholarly integrity of our work. Thank you once again for your diligent and thoughtful guidance.
Comment 3: Secondly, in the content of the work sentences start with a lowercase letter. Here are just a few examples: in lines 95,109,125, 129 141 and 450 is “. digital inclusive finance …”
The lower case letter is also found in the chepter 4.1.2. dimensional analysis.
This observation also applies to Tables 1 and 2.
In addition, in the content of the work, spaces are missing in many places e.g. in Table 1 Level of economic development(RGDP).
Authors’ Response: We are deeply grateful for your meticulous attention to detail in identifying issues with sentence starting cases and spacing throughout our manuscript. In response to your feedback, we have conducted a thorough review of the entire manuscript, ensuring that all sentences beginning with proper nouns or acronyms now start with the appropriate uppercase letter. Additionally, we have carefully checked and corrected the spacing in various parts of the text, including Tables 1 and 2, to ensure consistent formatting and readability. Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention, as addressing them has significantly improved the overall presentation and professionalism of our work.
Comment 4: Lastly, for the variables listed in Table 1, there are missing units, e.g. it is not known in what currency and amount the income of farms is. The same applies to Intermediary variable Wage income of farmers (WI).
Authors’ Response: We wish to express our sincere appreciation for your astute observation regarding the omission of units for the variables. Your feedback has prompted us to meticulously review and amend Table 1, ensuring that all variables now clearly indicate their respective units. For instance, the 'income of farmers' is now clearly indicated as being measured in ‘ten thousand yuan RMB’, ensuring transparency about the currency and amount used in our study. Similarly, the Intermediary variable 'Wage income of farmers (WI)' is now defined as being measured in ‘percentage (%)’, providing clarity on its unit of measurement. These corrections contribute to a more precise and complete presentation of our research findings. Thank you for your guidance in enhancing the accuracy and comprehensiveness of our work.
Comment 5: Authors should also consider adding a short note at the end of the Introduction section about the layout and content of the article.
Authors’ Response: We are truly grateful for your insightful suggestion to enhance the clarity and reader-friendliness of our article. In response to your recommendation, we have added a short note at the end of the Introduction section that outlines the layout and content of the article. This note provides readers with a concise overview of what to expect from each section, thereby helping them better understand the structure of our work. Thank you for this valuable advice, which has helped us improve the accessibility and organization of our manuscript.
Comment 6: In addition, Authors may consider adding a discussion, because there is none in the work.
Authors’ Response: We are truly grateful for the reviewer's insightful suggestion to enhance the scholarly depth of our work. In response, we have added a discussion section at the end of our manuscript, specifically within the conclusions part, to provide a more comprehensive analysis of our findings. This discussion compares our results with the remarkable achievements of studies based on internet access and income disparities. Thank you for guiding us towards enhancing the academic value and relevance of our research.
We are extremely grateful for all the expert comments and revisions suggested by you. Your insights and recommendations have significantly contributed to enhancing the quality and impact of our manuscript. If there are any further aspects you believe require adjustment or additional recommendations, we are eager to make those changes. We wish to reiterate our profound thanks to you for your invaluable input and guidance!
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Editors, Dear Authors,
I have read and reviewed the submitted article with great interest. It concerns an important aspect, not only social but also economic, of the development of small businesses.
I state that the aim of the work has been fully achieved. The authors correctly justified the research problem, ending it with 4 correctly formulated hypotheses. The methodology describes in detail the stages of research implementation and calculations performed. Statistical methods are correctly selected for the analyzed data sets.
The description of the empirical research is presented clearly and legibly, explaining the obtained research results and at the same time providing answers to the formulated hypotheses.
The work is written correctly, contains all the necessary chapters.
The conclusions respond to the stated aim of the work.
I recommend the work for printing in the presented form.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your thorough evaluation and positive feedback on our work. We are delighted to hear that the aim of our study has been fully achieved, and that the research problem and hypotheses have been correctly justified. The acknowledgment of our methodology and the selection of statistical methods is greatly appreciated, as it confirms the rigor and reliability of our research approach.
Manuscript ID:3140845
Comment ：The work is written correctly, contains all the necessary chapters.
The conclusions respond to the stated aim of the work.I recommend the work for printing in the presented form.
Authors’ Response:
We are thankful for the compliment regarding the clear and legible presentation of our empirical research, which not only explains the obtained results but also provides answers to the formulated hypotheses. The recognition that our work is correctly structured and contains all necessary chapters is a testament to our commitment to academic standards.
Furthermore, we appreciate the endorsement of our conclusions, which align with the stated objectives of our study. Your recommendation for printing our work in its current form is a significant encouragement and validation of our efforts.
Once again, thank you for your careful review and constructive feedback, which have been instrumental in bringing our research to its current level of quality.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper analyzes the impact of digital financial inclusion on the income of herdsmen in ethnic minority regions using panel data models from nine major pastoral provinces in China from 2011 to 2022. Generally, the structure of the paper is clear and complete, but the theoretical depth is general, and there is still room for improvement in the depth and breadth of the research. Here are some comments:
1.Abstract. The description of the study context/importance of the study is relatively good, the study methods and data are clearly described. However, if possible，these parts should be more simply and the main findings part should be more accurate and detailedly.
2.The introduction should outline the background of the undertaken research. However, the research gap is not discussed deeply enough. Increase the summary and brief review of relevant research literature, and highly refine the shortcomings of research and the main innovations or contributions of this manuscript.
3.Figures. The format of the figures should carefully refer to the journal requirements. Some words in the picture cannot be read clearly. Tables. The format of the tables should carefully refer to the journal requirements.
4.The layout of the full text (Including references)is very rough, and it is suggested that the author should carefully revise and improve according to the standards of the journal.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 4 Comments
Dear Reviewer:
Thank you for your letter and for the reviewer’s comments concerning our manuscript. Those constructive comments are all valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper, as well as the important guiding significance to our researches. We have studied comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with approval. And "Track Changes" function and highlighting function are both used for all corrections in the manuscript. For accurate answer, we separated the report into several comments, and replied each comment respectively.
Manuscript ID:3140845
Comment 1: Abstract. The description of the study context/importance of the study is relatively good, the study methods and data are clearly described. However, if possible，these parts should be more simply and the main findings part should be more accurate and detailedly.
Authors’ Response: Thank you for your feedback on the abstract. We have streamlined the description of the study context and importance, aiming for greater simplicity and clarity. Additionally, we have refined the main findings section to be more precise and detailed, providing a clearer overview of our results. These improvements should contribute to a more impactful and accessible abstract. Thank you for your guidance in enhancing the effectiveness of our abstract.
Comment 2: The introduction should outline the background of the undertaken research. However, the research gap is not discussed deeply enough. Increase the summary and brief review of relevant research literature, and highly refine the shortcomings of research and the main innovations or contributions of this manuscript.
Authors’ Response: Thank you for your insightful feedback on the introduction section of our manuscript. We have thoroughly addressed your concerns by substantially enhancing the discussion surrounding the research gap. Furthermore, we have carefully refined the articulation of the shortcomings in our research, as well as the main innovations or contributions that our manuscript brings to the field. We trust that these additions and refinements strengthen the impact and relevance of our introduction, setting a solid foundation for the reader to understand the significance of our research. Thank you for guiding us towards improving the clarity and depth of our manuscript's introduction.
Comment 3: Figures. The format of the figures should carefully refer to the journal requirements. Some words in the picture cannot be read clearly. Tables. The format of the tables should carefully refer to the journal requirements
Authors’ Response: We greatly appreciate your feedback on the quality of figures and tables. In response to your valuable feedback, we have meticulously reviewed and revised all figures and tables in our manuscript to ensure strict adherence to the journal’s specific requirements. We have also taken measures to enhance the legibility of all text within the figures, ensuring that every word is now clearly readable. We appreciate your attention to these details and are confident that these improvements contribute to a more polished and compliant submission. Thank you for your guidance in helping us improve the presentation of our research.
Comment 4: The layout of the full text (Including references)is very rough, and it is suggested that the author should carefully revise and improve according to the standards of the journal.
Authors’ Response: We are grateful for your feedback on the layout of our manuscript. In response to your suggestions, we have meticulously revised and improved the overall formatting and layout of the full text, including references, to align more closely with the journal's standards. We have paid particular attention to ensuring a clean, organized presentation throughout the document to enhance readability and meet the high standards expected by the journal. Thank you for your guidance in helping us elevate the professionalism and presentation quality of our submission.
We are deeply grateful for the reviewer's meticulous examination and valuable feedback on our work. We have incorporated your suggestions to enhance the analytical depth and reflective nature of our paper, effectively addressing the concerns raised. Thank you once again for your careful review and constructive recommendations, which have significantly contributed to the integrity and depth of our research.
