Using Marginal Land Resources to Solve the Shortage of Rural Entrepreneurial Land in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is interesting and well structured. Thanks for your work!
1/ The topic is interesting, but the text is too general. The whole paper is just a text description. It should have gone deeper into the analysis. Also, the results obtained could have been described more accurately.
2/ The aim and research questions should be stated in the introduction.
3/ In the conclusions, I propose to directly refer to the objectives of the research
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments:
Line 24. Keyword. Please consider that some of these keywords are already in the title; I suggest including additional relevant keywords to facilitate searching the paper in major databases.
Line 58. “billion mu”. Please explain mu for non-Chinese readers. However, since Land is an international journal, it is imperative to present first values in the international system, i.e., hectares. In this sense, “Instructions for Authors” are clear: “SI Units (International System of Units) should be used. Imperial, US customary and other units should be converted to SI units whenever possible”. Please modify.
Line 61, Figure 2. I am quite sceptical about the usefulness of including this figure (also figure 1) in the introduction. Basically, the authors use a lot of space to state a simple concept that can be reported only as text (the rural population accounted for only 36.11 %); it is sufficient to insert the reference. Please consider removing figures from the introduction.
Line 87. GDP. Please present abbreviations and acronyms where they first appear in the text.
Line 100. Literature review. Review methodology is not presented; please provide a clear working methodology for the replicability of the method and, obviously, for readers' clarity.
Lines 114-117. Definition of marginal land. Please consider the papers that clearly defines the paradigm of marginal lands; inside, some definitions by different institutions, including the Chinese MOA.
Line 195. Figure 4. Please present Figure 4 (and all figures) also in the text. The figure is low quality (borders and text not visible), please increase the resolution.
Line 202. CNY. Please present this abbreviation.
Line 265. Figure 6. Similarly to Figure 4, please present Figure 6 in the text. The image is low resolution.
Line 298. Figure 7. Please present Figure 7 in the text.
Line 323. Line 323. Figure 8. Please present Figure 8 in the text.
Line 365. Conclusions. It seems that the authors have inverted the discussion headers with the conclusions. Please modify.
General impression. The authors state and present the manuscript as a review, but in my opinion, it is more suitable as a case study, and that heading should be changed. In fact, instructions for authors for land states: “Reviews: These provide concise and precise updates on the latest progress made in a given area of research ….”.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The presentation reflects the present state of knowledge. The paper is very well structured. The Introduction section is good, in this section the authors presents clearly the objectives and the main contributions of the study. The authors had provided sufficient background and include relevant references. The method is adequately described. The results are clearly presented. The conclusions are supported by the results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
accept
