Agri-Food Sector in Ukraine and Poland: A Comparative Analysis Using the Input–Output Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Agri-food sector in Ukraine and Poland: a comparative analysis using the input-output model 

Łukasz Ambroziak and Małgorzata Bułkowska 

This study compares the agri-food sectors of Ukraine and Poland using global input-output tables from OECD. The contribution of domestic and imported materials, domestic use and exports, inter-sectoral product intensities, dependence on industrial products and sectors, and relative importance of the national productions in the global agri-food economy were studied and discussed. The methodology used was the economic input-output models were used along with calculations for product intentsity coefficients. The resulting numbers are discussed in the context of historical evolution of the Ukrainian agri-food economy and its future in the wake of the war and foreign direct investment. 

This manuscript is the first to study national economic sectors, inter sectoral connections and foreign economies using the input-output model. The insights generated are novel, interesting, and supported by extensive calculations. However, the manuscript will benefit from rewriting the abstract and introduction sections, with more emphasis on the background, need for this study, and more discussion accompanying the calculations. Following are suggestions on sections that will benefit from additional text and typographical errors. 

1. > Abstract : The flow of ideas in the abstract does not follow rationally. This section must be rearranged and/or rewritten. Firstly, there is no mention of the need for such a study and as such the “research gap” has not been well identified. The contributions can also be better stated with the broader implications mentioned.  

2. > Across the abstract and introduction, the motivation does not become apparent and therefore the novelty does not come through. The literature review must be made more extensive and the novelty must be stressed on in the rewrite. 

3. > Literature review also needs to mention some background on I/O models and whether they have been used in similar contexts for other economic sectors 

4. > Figure 4 needs a more descriptive caption. It is not clear what the “in percent” refers to. 

5. > Is there a significance between choosing to look at the broad sectors “agriculture” and “food”? Have other broad classes been considered? 

6. > Lines 302 – 307. Does this mean that the agricultural production is more sensitive to service sectors in Poland? Some more discussion/ insight can be included here. 

7. > Similarly, lines 325-327, 330-331, 336-337, 342-343 will benefit from some accompanying insight. 

8. > Lines 536-538 “An analysis of production and trade data indicates some changes that occurred during the period. The agri-food sector global production and trade in the products have decreased.” Would possibly fit better in the introduction and is also missing references. Is this from the authors’ calculations? If so, are the numbers being discussed in supplementary information? 

9. > The conclusion should contain more text on the broader implication of this study and how it can be interpreted similar to the reorientations seen before, If the I/O tables from those years predicted the reorientation, that must also be mentioned.

Author Response

Answer to Review 1

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for all comments and suggestions. We have modified it as much as possible. We hope that incorporating your comments and suggestions will enhance the value of the article and make it clearer and more readable for the audience. All our corrections to the manuscript (except for the references) have been made using the "Track Changes" option.

Thank you.

Authors

 

Comments 1: This manuscript is the first to study national economic sectors, inter sectoral connections and foreign economies using the input-output model. The insights generated are novel, interesting, and supported by extensive calculations. However, the manuscript will benefit from rewriting the abstract and introduction sections, with more emphasis on the background, need for this study, and more discussion accompanying the calculations. Following are suggestions on sections that will benefit from additional text and typographical errors. 

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. We have modified it as much as possible.

 

Comments 2: > Abstract : The flow of ideas in the abstract does not follow rationally. This section must be rearranged and/or rewritten. Firstly, there is no mention of the need for such a study and as such the “research gap” has not been well identified. The contributions can also be better stated with the broader implications mentioned.  

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. The abstract has been modified. The existence of a research gap has been highlighted: “Contrary to Poland, the agri-food sector of Ukraine has not yet been the subject of research using input-output tables.” The usefulness of analyses conducted using input-output tables has also been highlighted: “The input-output model has many advantages in studying the structures of individual sectors and their connections with other sectors of the economy and with foreign countries.”

 

Comments 3: > Across the abstract and introduction, the motivation does not become apparent and therefore the novelty does not come through. The literature review must be made more extensive and the novelty must be stressed on in the rewrite. 

Response 3: To make the motivation and research gap more evident, the introduction has been expanded and studies using input-output models to analyze the agri-food sector in Poland and other countries have been cited. The main conclusions from these studies are presented in a synthetic form.

 

Comments 4: > Literature review also needs to mention some background on I/O models and whether they have been used in similar contexts for other economic sectors 

Response 4: A review of the literature related to the study of the agri-food sector in Poland and other countries using input-output tables has been conducted. This highlights the absence of such research concerning the agri-food sector in Ukraine.

 

Comments 5: > Figure 4 needs a more descriptive caption. It is not clear what the “in percent” refers to. 

Response 5: The title has been corrected. The correct figure name is: The shares of the agri-food sector in the Ukrainian and Polish economy in 2020, in percent.

 

Comments 6: > Is there a significance between choosing to look at the broad sectors “agriculture” and “food”? Have other broad classes been considered? 

Response 6: Thank you for the question. The analysis covered the following ISIC Rev. 4 divisions: 01 and 02 (Agriculture, including hunting and forestry) and 10, 11, and 12 (Food products, beverages, and tobacco). This scope is commonly used in studies of the agri-food sector. It has been added in section Research method and data sources.

 

Comments 7: > Lines 302 – 307. Does this mean that the agricultural production is more sensitive to service sectors in Poland? Some more discussion/ insight can be included here. 

Response 7: Thank you for the comment. It means that agricultural production in Ukraine is more dependent on services than in Poland. The short explanation has been added.

 

Comments 8: > Similarly, lines 325-327, 330-331, 336-337, 342-343 will benefit from some accompanying insight. 

Response 8: Thank you for pointing this out. The short explanations have been added.

 

Comments 9: > Lines 536-538 “An analysis of production and trade data indicates some changes that occurred during the period. The agri-food sector global production and trade in the products have decreased.” Would possibly fit better in the introduction and is also missing references. Is this from the authors’ calculations? If so, are the numbers being discussed in supplementary information? 

Response 9: Thank you for such comment. The paragraph has been modified.

 

Comments 10: > The conclusion should contain more text on the broader implication of this study and how it can be interpreted similar to the reorientations seen before, If the I/O tables from those years predicted the reorientation, that must also be mentioned.

Response 10: A paragraphs regarding to limitations and further research have been added.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

The topic is regarding a comparative analysis of Agri-food sectors in Ukraine and Poland. The manuscript utilizes the 2020 global MRIO from OECD TiVA database and compares coefficients between two countries. It tries to provide effective suggestions to Poland for competing with Ukraine in the agri-food sector. However, several parts of this work should be explained clearly.

(1) Introduction section. It is not clear why is it important to explore the agri-food sector in Ukraine. The authors describe more information about Ukraine but less about Poland. So it is hard to find a competitive relationship between the two countries.

(2) Theoretical aspects of input-output model section.

In input-output analysis, the column represents inputs that indicate the supply required by production. Thus, the total means total inputs although the amount is the same as the total output. In my opinion, it should be distinguished from the output. Equation (1) also should be improved.

Equation (6). v indicates the value added per output. Is the global production meaning the output? In addition, more information should be provided to connect the model with this analysis, such as how to handle v and e to obtain the final results.

(3) Research method and data sources section

I do not follow the meanings of “(1)”, “(2)”… Please explain more.

(4) Research results section

Figure 4. How to calculate shares?

Figure 5. The legend of “Gross valuea added” should be corrected.

(5) Comparison section

Table 1. The authors do not mention employment above, so why display it here?

(6) Discussion section

In my opinion, the core of this manuscript is to provide effective implications for Poland because of the complete relationship with Ukraine in Agri-food sector. Thus, in discussion, the authors could discuss more about Poland.

Author Response

Answer to Review 2

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for all comments and suggestions. We have modified it as much as possible. We hope that incorporating your comments and suggestions will enhance the value of the article and make it clearer and more readable for the audience. All our corrections to the manuscript (except for the references) have been made using the "Track Changes" option.

Thank you.

Authors

 

Comments 1: (1) Introduction section. It is not clear why is it important to explore the agri-food sector in Ukraine. The authors describe more information about Ukraine but less about Poland. So it is hard to find a competitive relationship between the two countries.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We have modified Introduction section to emphasize this point. The paragraph containing comparison of production potential of Ukraine and Poland have been reformulated and some data about Poland have been added. The existence of a research gap has been highlighted. Some studies using input-output tables with reference to Poland and other countries have been cited, along with the main conclusions drawn from these studies. The rationale for selecting the year 2020 for the analysis has been provided.

 

Comments 2: (2) Theoretical aspects of input-output model section.

In input-output analysis, the column represents inputs that indicate the supply required by production. Thus, the total means total inputs although the amount is the same as the total output. In my opinion, it should be distinguished from the output. Equation (1) also should be improved.

Response 2: Thank you for the comment. The description of a column and row as well as equation (1) and (2) was corrected. Although the individual columns mean sum of inputs, according to the OECD TiVA Guide the sum is defined as “gross output”.

 

Comments 3:  Equation (6). v indicates the value added per output. Is the global production meaning the output? In addition, more information should be provided to connect the model with this analysis, such as how to handle v and e to obtain the final results.

Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. Instead of “global production” should be “gross output”. The expansion of formula (6) is presented using the example of a global economy consisting of three countries and one sector.

 

Comments 4:  (3) Research method and data sources section

I do not follow the meanings of “(1)”, “(2)”… Please explain more.

Response 4: The explanations have been corrected. The correct description is: “the equation of costs of gross output (1), the equation for the distribution of gross output (2)”

 

 

Comments 5: (4) Research results section

Figure 4. How to calculate shares?

Response 5: It has been corrected. The correct figure name is: The shares of the agri-food sector in the Ukrainian and Polish economy in 2020, in percent.

 

Comments 6: Figure 5. The legend of “Gross valuea added” should be corrected.

Response 6: Thank you for mindfulness. It has been corrected.

 

Comments 7: (5) Comparison section

Table 1. The authors do not mention employment above, so why display it here?

Response 7: Table 1 and paragraph related to employment have been removed.

 

Comments 8: (6) Discussion section

In my opinion, the core of this manuscript is to provide effective implications for Poland because of the complete relationship with Ukraine in Agri-food sector. Thus, in discussion, the authors could discuss more about Poland.

Response 8: In chapter Discussion some issues related Poland 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Major weaknesses of this manuscript.

1. The manuscript lacks a logical justification for why a comparative analysis of the static situation (in 2020) of the agro-food sector of two countries (Ukraine and Poland) was performed. What is the practical or theoretical applicability of such results? It is not enough to evaluate the performance of the agro-food sector of both countries based on the analysis of only one year of data and to draw conclusions about the prospects and changes of this sector in Ukraine after the war. It should be noted that the opportunities (economic and political) for the participation or involvement of both countries (Ukraine and Poland) in the global value chains of agri-food are very different in the global, and especially in the EU market. In addition, the performance of the Ukrainian food sector and its participation in the international markets of intermediate and final products were (and still are) greatly affected by Russia's war against Ukraine. The same cannot be said about the Polish agri-food sector. In addition, Ukraine's agricultural and food sector faces strong competition from other countries, exporting large quantities of agri-food products to global and EU markets.

2. Although the title mentions two countries, in the subsections of the Introduction, Discussion and Conclusions the attention is focused entirely on the development of the Ukrainian agro-food sector, emphasizing the relevance of the current war's impact on it. However, the discussion subsection relies on the results of this study about the situation of the Ukrainian agro-food sector in 2020 and mainly cites publications from the pre-war period. These subsections deal with the issues of the development of the Polish agri-food sector in a fragmentary manner. In the conclusions subsection, assumptions are made about the possible impact of Poland on the competitiveness of the Ukrainian agro-food sector after the war, although the issues and indicators of the competitiveness of both countries in the international or EU markets were not analysed and compared.

3. The manuscript incorrectly uses terms such as "global output", "global production" or "agriculture global production" when talking about the output of the agro-food sector of a separate country (Ukraine or Poland). A global output or global production refer to the output of the entire world economy, but not the economy of an individual country. Meanwhile, this study uses the Trade in Value Added (TiVA) data for the analysis based on the country's aggregate indicator "Gross Output". (“This indicator is extracted directly from ICIO and defined as the production (gross output) at basic prices by industry i in country c: PROD𝑐,𝑖=Xc, i The estimates are compatible, to the greatest extent possible, with the latest available official System of National Accounts, 2008 (2008 SNA) annual statistics”. Read more in Guide to OECD Trade in Value Added (TiVA) Indicators, 2023 edition OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation November 2023). Thus, TiVA provides information about a country's participation/engagement in global value chains, not about the country's "global production".

Author Response

Answer to Review 3

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for all comments and suggestions. We have modified it as much as possible. We hope that incorporating your comments and suggestions will enhance the value of the article and make it clearer and more readable for the audience. All our corrections to the manuscript (except for the references) have been made using the "Track Changes" option.

Thank you.

Authors

 

Comments 1:

The manuscript lacks a logical justification for why a comparative analysis of the static situation (in 2020) of the agro-food sector of two countries (Ukraine and Poland) was performed. What is the practical or theoretical applicability of such results? It is not enough to evaluate the performance of the agro-food sector of both countries based on the analysis of only one year of data and to draw conclusions about the prospects and changes of this sector in Ukraine after the war. It should be noted that the opportunities (economic and political) for the participation or involvement of both countries (Ukraine and Poland) in the global value chains of agri-food are very different in the global, and especially in the EU market. In addition, the performance of the Ukrainian food sector and its participation in the international markets of intermediate and final products were (and still are) greatly affected by Russia's war against Ukraine. The same cannot be said about the Polish agri-food sector. In addition, Ukraine's agricultural and food sector faces strong competition from other countries, exporting large quantities of agri-food products to global and EU markets.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the majority of these comments. We have modified to emphasize this point.  The article focuses on comparing the structure of the agri-food sector in two countries: (1) Ukraine, a country that is a significant global producer and exporter of many basic agricultural commodities and whose economy has been developing under wartime conditions since 2022, and (2) Poland, a country that is an important global and EU producer and exporter of many processed agri-food products. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has highlighted that Ukraine and Poland may compete in the global and EU markets by exporting the same products. This poses a risk to Poland, as its competitive position in exporting certain agri-food products to the EU market may be threatened. In this context, the article compares the structure of Ukraine's and Poland's agri-food sectors. To conduct this comparison, the assumption was made that these structures do not change over time. The study focuses on the current state rather than the changes occurring in the structure of the agri-food sector in both countries. The year 2020 was selected for analysis, as it provides the most up-to-date data on input-output tables. Such tables are usually published with a delay of several years. Currently, input-output tables for the period of the Ukraine-Russia war are not available, making such an analysis impossible. Therefore, based on the most recent data (2020) and the known development paths of the agri-food sector from the literature, the author draws conclusions about the prospects and changes in this sector in Ukraine after the war. The relevant justification is provided in the Introduction and the "Research methods and data sources" section: “The study assumed that the structure of the agri-food sector in Ukraine and Poland would be compared (static approach). Therefore, the comparison of the direction and scale of changes occurring in the sector of both countries was omitted. The analysis focused on the year 2020, as it was the most recent year for which input-output tables were available in the OECD Trade in Value Added database. Although 2020 was the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, it did not significantly affect the structure of the agri-food sector in either country.”

 

The author is aware that the opportunities for both countries to participate in global value chains in the agri-food sector vary between the global market and the EU market. These opportunities depend on several factors, including the country's position in the development path of the agri-food sector, the characteristics of this sector, its linkages with other sectors of the national economy, and its connections with foreign markets.

Undoubtedly, the war in Ukraine affects the performance of the Ukrainian agri-food sector and its participation in global value chains. However, input-output tables currently do not allow for an assessment of this impact, as the most recent available data is from 2020. The impact of the war on Ukraine's agri-food sector can be assessed based on traditional trade statistics and the results of analyses conducted by other researchers.

 

Comments 2:

Although the title mentions two countries, in the subsections of the Introduction, Discussion and Conclusions the attention is focused entirely on the development of the Ukrainian agro-food sector, emphasizing the relevance of the current war's impact on it. However, the discussion subsection relies on the results of this study about the situation of the Ukrainian agro-food sector in 2020 and mainly cites publications from the pre-war period. These subsections deal with the issues of the development of the Polish agri-food sector in a fragmentary manner. In the conclusions subsection, assumptions are made about the possible impact of Poland on the competitiveness of the Ukrainian agro-food sector after the war, although the issues and indicators of the competitiveness of both countries in the international or EU markets were not analysed and compared.

Response 2: Thank you for your comments. The cited publications from the pre-war period focus on the development paths of the agri-food sector in other countries. Research and experiences from other countries show that the development paths of agribusiness are universal and can be applied to describe the development of agribusiness in most countries.

We have modified Introduction section to emphasize this point. The paragraph containing comparison of production potential of Ukraine and Poland have been reformulated and some data about Poland have been added. The existence of a research gap has been highlighted. Some studies using input-output tables with reference to Poland and other countries have been cited, along with the main conclusions drawn from these studies. The rationale for selecting the year 2020 for the analysis has been provided.

In the discussion section, the main conclusions regarding Ukraine's agri-food sector are contrasted with those concerning Poland's agri-food sector. Reference is made, among other sources, to the study by Bułkowska and Bazhanova [2023], which indicates which products Ukraine and Poland compete with in the EU market.

The conclusions section summarizes the key insights from the study for both Ukraine and Poland. In particular, it notes that an assessment of changes in the agri-food sector in Ukraine and Poland during the war will be possible in the future when input-output tables become available, as these are typically published with a several-year delay. The conclusions section also includes paragraphs addressing limitations and suggestions for further research.

 

Comments 3:

The manuscript incorrectly uses terms such as "global output", "global production" or "agriculture global production" when talking about the output of the agro-food sector of a separate country (Ukraine or Poland). A global output or global production refer to the output of the entire world economy, but not the economy of an individual country. Meanwhile, this study uses the Trade in Value Added (TiVA) data for the analysis based on the country's aggregate indicator "Gross Output". (“This indicator is extracted directly from ICIO and defined as the production (gross output) at basic prices by industry i in country c: PROD?,?=Xc, i The estimates are compatible, to the greatest extent possible, with the latest available official System of National Accounts, 2008 (2008 SNA) annual statistics”. Read more in Guide to OECD Trade in Value Added (TiVA) Indicators, 2023 edition OECD, Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation November 2023). Thus, TiVA provides information about a country's participation/engagement in global value chains, not about the country's "global production".

Response 3: Thank you for pointing out the inconsistencies in the terminology used. Indeed, “global output,” “global production,” and “agriculture global production” are terms that all refer to worldwide production.Gross output is a term which refers to the economy of an individual country. The terms were corrected according to the Guide to OECD Trade in Value Added (TiVA) Indicators, 2023 edition.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is evident that this article represents a highly significant contribution to the international discourse on agricultural food development. The research framework and methodology employed are scientifically rigorous and capable of underpinning the findings presented. However, addressing the following issues could potentially enhance the quality of this paper:

 

Please clarify specific research questions and contributions in the introduction section.

Deepen practical implications in the discussion section: The discussion section could be expanded to delve deeper into the practical implications of the research findings. This includes discussing how the results can inform policy decisions, industry practices, or further research in the field of international agricultural food supply.

Include recent relevant literature: It is recommended to supplement the existing literature review with approximately five recent publications (ideally within the past two years) that are directly related to the research topic.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for all comments and suggestions. We have modified it as much as possible. We hope that incorporating your comments and suggestions will enhance the value of the article and make it clearer and more readable for the audience. All our corrections to the manuscript have been made using the "Track Changes" option.

Thank you.

Authors

 

Comments 1: Please clarify specific research questions and contributions in the introduction section.

Response 1: Two research questions have been added.

 

Comments 2: Deepen practical implications in the discussion section: The discussion section could be expanded to delve deeper into the practical implications of the research findings. This includes discussing how the results can inform policy decisions, industry practices, or further research in the field of international agricultural food supply. 

Response 2: A paragraph was added in the Discussion, highlighting that caution should be exercised when writing about the future development path of Ukraine's agri-food sector. Some other supplements have been added. One paragraph containing practical implication for Polish agri-food sector has been added in the Discussion. 

 

Comments 3: Include recent relevant literature: It is recommended to supplement the existing literature review with approximately five recent publications (ideally within the past two years) that are directly related to the research topic.

Response 3: One of the most important factors stimulating changes in the agri-food sector in Poland was Polish integration with the European Union.  There is a high probability that Ukraine will follow this way. Thus, some recent relevant references have been added. However, it should be noted that the added literature sources in the analysis did not utilize the inter-industry method.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My confusions have been solved by the revised manuscript. In my opinion, it is a valuable study and should be published.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for all remarks and suggestions and finally acceptance of the article.\

Best regards,

Authors

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Critical notes following manuscript improvements:

1. The authors emphasize that they use 2020 data to analyze the state of the agro-food sector, as this is the latest data in the TiVA database. This is an invalid argument. The results of the 2020 analysis and the conclusions and recommendations based on them regarding the development of the Ukrainian agro-sector and the competitive position of the Polish agro-food sector in relation to it remain the main weakness of this study. First of all, due to the fact that one year (2020) information was used for the condition analysis, which shows the performance of the sector in extreme conditions. In 2020, the flows of both intermediate and final products of the agro-food sector in both domestic and international markets were significantly disrupted due to the restrictions and conditions applied during the COVID pandemic, which led to structural changes in the sector. The data for 2020 show the state of the agro-food sector in extreme conditions, so they are not suitable for a comparative analysis of both countries and modeling of possible structural changes in the Ukrainian agro-food sector in the future (after the war). To eliminate such extremes, it is customary to use average data of at least 3 years in economic analysis, or not to use data from extreme years for measuring economic performance.

2. Another limitation of this study is that the authors, based on the 2020 indicator values, draw conclusions and recommendations about the future development of the Ukrainian agro-food sector, despite the fact that the Ukrainian economy has declined (and continues to decline) due to the war, the economic structure has changed, export flows have been disrupted and changed as well, and the domestic demand for final products has also changed due to a large population number of people leaving the country due to the war.

3. The third limitation of this manuscript is that the authors model the possible directions of structural changes in the Ukrainian agro-food sector ("changes in the structure of the gross output of the Ukrainian food industry may take the following directions") based on old, irrelevant literature ( e.g., "According to the literature [14, 33]", i.e. [Poczta et al., 2004; Czyżewski, 1995]); etc.

Author Response

Comments 1. The authors emphasize that they use 2020 data to analyze the state of the agro-food sector, as this is the latest data in the TiVA database. This is an invalid argument. The results of the 2020 analysis and the conclusions and recommendations based on them regarding the development of the Ukrainian agro-sector and the competitive position of the Polish agro-food sector in relation to it remain the main weakness of this study. First of all, due to the fact that one year (2020) information was used for the condition analysis, which shows the performance of the sector in extreme conditions. In 2020, the flows of both intermediate and final products of the agro-food sector in both domestic and international markets were significantly disrupted due to the restrictions and conditions applied during the COVID pandemic, which led to structural changes in the sector. The data for 2020 show the state of the agro-food sector in extreme conditions, so they are not suitable for a comparative analysis of both countries and modeling of possible structural changes in the Ukrainian agro-food sector in the future (after the war). To eliminate such extremes, it is customary to use average data of at least 3 years in economic analysis, or not to use data from extreme years for measuring economic performance.

Response 1: Thank you for the comments. Choosing the time frame for the analysis is not easy and often causes several problems. The quality of the research and the conclusions drawn often depend on this choice. As explained earlier, the year 2020 was chosen for the analysis in this study because it was the most recent year for which data was available in the OECD TiVA database. The biggest concern with this choice is that 2020 was the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, as numerous studies conducted by IAFE NRI have shown [*], the agri-food sector was relatively resilient to crisis phenomena. This was mainly because the demand for food is relatively inelastic. This means that changes in prices or incomes result in a relatively small decrease in food demand. For example, the demand for durable consumer goods declines at a much faster rate during a crisis.

The analysis could also be conducted based on data from a different period, such as 2019 or even the average for the years 2018-2020. Each approach has its pros and cons. However, changing the study period may raise concerns among the other Reviewers, who have already accepted the choice of 2020 in their previous reviews.

However, in response to the comments received, we would like to ask which approach is recommended by the Reviewer in this regard? Which period should be chosen for the analysis?

 

[*] Szczepaniak, I., Ambroziak, Ł. i Szajner, P. (2023). Handel zagraniczny i międzynarodowa konkurencyjność polskiego sektora rolno-spożywczego. W: S. Łaba (red.), Analiza sytuacji ekonomiczno-produkcyjnej rolnictwa i gospodarki żywnościowej na początku trzeciej dekady XXI wieku (s. 365–394). IERiGŻ PIB. http://www.ierigz.waw.pl/publikacje/poza-seria/25428,13,3,0,analiza-sytuacji-ekonomiczno-produkcyjnej-rolnictwa-i-gospodarki-zywnosciowej-na-poczatku-trzeciej-dekady-xxi-wieku.html

 

Comments 2. Another limitation of this study is that the authors, based on the 2020 indicator values, draw conclusions and recommendations about the future development of the Ukrainian agro-food sector, despite the fact that the Ukrainian economy has declined (and continues to decline) due to the war, the economic structure has changed, export flows have been disrupted and changed as well, and the domestic demand for final products has also changed due to a large population number of people leaving the country due to the war.

Response 2: Thank you for comments. The discussion section highlighted that, as a result of the war in Ukraine, the development path of its agri-food sector may look different, and the changes taking place may take more time.

 

Comments 3. The third limitation of this manuscript is that the authors model the possible directions of structural changes in the Ukrainian agro-food sector ("changes in the structure of the gross output of the Ukrainian food industry may take the following directions") based on old, irrelevant literature ( e.g., "According to the literature [14, 33]", i.e. [Poczta et al., 2004; Czyżewski, 1995]); etc.

Response 3: Thank you very much for pointing this out. Reference was made to more recent literature, which defines the development paths of the agri-food sector.

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The very fragmentary revisions of the manuscript made by the authors did not eliminate the main shortcomings of the article.

1. The authors' argument that the data for 2020 is the latest in the TiVA database is incorrect because the Ukrainian agro-food sector experienced huge declines in the year of the Covid pandemic, as well as since the start of the war in 2022. As a counterargument, I provide some information. For example, according to the data published by FAOSTAT (https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/MK), the real annual decline (annual growth of the Value Added at 2015 prices US$) of the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sector was -10.7%, in 2020 and -28.4% in 2022 (in Poland +15.3% and +1.1%, respectively). I will note that in 2022, the decline of this sector, in terms of actual prices (annual growth US$), in Ukraine reached -39.3% (in Poland +27.9%, respectively). In 2020, the export volume of Ukrainian Agricultural Products decreased by 9.8% and Food (excluding fish) by 10.4%, and in 2022, the export volumes declined by 14.2% and 13.2%, respectively. On the contrary, Poland's export volume of both groups increased in the same year. The corresponding data were +26.2% and 26.5%, and +3.7% and 3.8% respectively. The annual change in export volume was calculated based on the values ​​of the FAOSTAT Export Quantity Index (2014-2016=100). The war continues to affect the Ukrainian economy and the agri-food sector in terms of domestic production of intermediate and final products, their domestic consumption and foreign trade flows.

2. Thus, the empirical analysis based on the 2020 data and obtained results are not suitable for concluding and insights about the development and structural changes of the Ukrainian agro-food sector in the future. It should be added that due to the ongoing war, data from the previous years up to 2020 are also unsuitable for the empirical analysis of the case of Ukraine.

Author Response

Responses: Thank you for your comments and remarks. All our previous responses are valid. We still believe that, despite certain limitations, which we mention several times in the article, a comparative analysis of the agri-food sector in Ukraine and Poland can be conducted, and it is possible to identify where these countries stand on the development path of the agri-food sector as described in the literature. The advantage of this study lies in its methodology, specifically the input-output analysis method. Such a study is lacking in the literature.

As mentioned in the Introduction (rows 107-109), the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly affect Ukraine's agri-food sector. According to data from ICIO, the value added of Ukraine's agriculture (in US current basic prices) in 2020 was 4.9% higher than in 2019, while the value added of Ukraine's food industry was 14.7% higher. The gross output of Ukraine's agriculture in 2020 was 2.6% higher than in 2019, and the food industry's gross output was 9.7% higher.

	in million US current basic prices
		Agriculture		Food industry
		2019	2020	2019	2020
Ukraine	Value Added	13762	14430	4588	5261
	Gross Output	33259	34122	25610	28105

A paragraph was added in the Discussion, highlighting that caution should be exercised when writing about the future development path of Ukraine's agri-food sector.