The Impacts and Spatial Characteristics of High-Standard Farmland Construction on Agricultural Carbon Productivity
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIMPACTS AND SPATIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH-STANDARD FARMLAND 2 CONSTRUCTION ON AGRICULTURAL CARBON PRODUCTIVITY
Dear authors:
Some recommendations and comments that could improve the original article are noted. It is important to note that the article requires a minor revision, since there are too many errors in formulas, concepts, and omission of results.
L 29: The keywords must be different from those in the title: high-standard farmland construction; agricultural carbon productivity
L 119: Add space: … [15]. On
L 211: The equation number is in different line. Please, revise the rest of equation.
L 211: What do the variables mean?: a, b and bn
L218-219. The equation number is in different line. What do the variables mean?: a0, a1 …
L 229: Ln in Eq. 4 is the same that ln in Eq. 3?. Use the same notation. Define the rest of variables or constants
L 253: Use superscripts for the units: km2…
L 253: Add point: WU et al. (2020)
L 253: 19. 857 5kg or 19. 8575kg. Same error in the note
L 255: WU et al. [21] is not in the references. Please check that all references are cited in the text.
L 365: What does it physically imply that some results are negative? Would the interpretation change if they were positive? Please comment.
L 405: change production by Production and western by Western
L 477: Why not use the Geary´s C ?
L 495: What normality test was used to say that the data has a normal distribution?
L 520: Add a few lines about what information was missing to carry out this study. And for future studies, what information could be included in the measurements.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper is interesting and covers an important issue, which is the impact of agricultural production on the environment.
However, some aspects need to be better introduced or changed, as follows:
The meaning of high-standard farmland needs to be introduced, and defined. In paragraph 3.2.2. it is not clear enough. Is it about large-scale farms that aim to continuously improve productivity through inventions in chemistry and machinery technology and are mostly monocultures? What is their role and importance in the implementation of sustainable development and care for biodiversity?
The methods and statistical tests and models used in the data analyses should be clearly presented in the Method part. In the present form, it is not structured and introduced well.
The presentation of input data is not enough. It is not possible to verify the presented results, a more detailed characteristic of the input data should be included.
There is no discussion with the results from other parts of the world, it is too concentrated on the China case.
The bibliography should be extended with publications regarding other countries besides China, in present there is a 70% position regarding one country.
I suggest to change 2. Research Hypothesis for Research Assumptions because hypotheses are given at the end after an introduction and elaboration of the problem, which is well prepared.
Line 271: the natural ecological environment - does not exist, what does it mean?
Table 5 – AR 1, AR 2 – are not introduced
abbreviation GMM - should be developed
Line 433 – model 7? It is not presented in table 5
Overall, corrections in editing and formatting the paper body are required (i.a. in equations)
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsGood paper. It can be accepted.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsWhat is written in the Abstract is interesting. But for the reader of a scientific article, it would be more attractive to provide information about what novel scientific findings were presented. What new does this study bring to science? I want to ask for a thorough reconstruction of the Abstract.
If the author writes, "The policy effect is widely recognized as one of the effective paths to reduce agricultural carbon emissions and promote agricultural economic growth," more than two references should be provided to the literature.
The authors wrote, "Still, studies have yet to explore whether the construction of high-standard farmland can consider agriculture's ecological and economic benefits and improve its carbon productivity. At the same time, there is a lack of literature that systematically researches the mechanism and influence path of high-standard farmland construction on agricultural carbon productivity, which is still a "black box" to be explored." Such a statement is possible when authors carry out a systematic literature review. I do not see any information about this procedure.
The development of hypotheses and, first of all, research goals and problems is preceded by a thorough literature analysis. Please supplement the article with an in-depth literature study, including a systematic literature review.
This is an interesting analysis, but I still repeat the request to "scientify" this text. There needs to be a reference to what this analysis contributed to the research, what theory was supplemented or created, what other researchers agreed with, and what they did not agree with. What are the limitations of research? The limitations are always.
The text contains an interesting analysis but is prepared in the style of an industry magazine, not a scientific journal. Several fundamental changes need to be made to the text. It is not suitable for publication in this form.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguagePlease analyse the text regarding the style, punctuation and spelling used. Please choose British or American English and consistently use the chosen style throughout the article.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsNo comments
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thank you again for your positive comments and valuable suggestions to improve the quality of our manuscript.
Best wishes,
Xayire Xiaokaiti
