Dietary Power and Self-Determination among Female Farmers in Burkina Faso: A Proposal for a Food Consumption Agency Metric
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study is of certain significance to study female farmers' dietary rights and self-determination from the indicators of food consumption institutions. However, the following points of this study should be discussed with the author:
First, whether the research topic of this paper is suitable for the positioning of Land journal.
Second, can this research use econometric model to study how dietary power and self-determination among Female Farmers and the related impact.
Third, figure 1 of this study is not clear, and the author needs to further modify it.
Fourthly, the format is wrong in line 499-500 of this research.
Author Response
- We believe that this paper explores the intersection of land system use and health nexuses, and although biodiversity is not at the forefront, it explores how biodiversity impacts dietary diversity. In order to increase its relevance to the journal, list these topics more clearly in the introduction and later in the agency and dietary diversity analysis portion.
- Neither of the authors has a strong background in econometrics. We agree with your idea that an econometric model would help; however, do not feel qualified to create and report on one, especially in the quick turnaround for revisions. However, we explored how it could further improve the application of FCAM in the conclusion and listed it as an option for further study by someone more qualified to apply this theory. We both wish we had the knowledge to apply this model as we think it could reveal interesting findings related to the worry aspect of the metric and how spending impacts it in theory (nutrition transition) versus in practice (an empirical reduction in worry reports).
- We added supplemental text before and after the figure explaining why the villages were distinguished/highlighted to clarify what the figure is meant to communicate.
- The manuscript sent to us to implement these suggestions did not have line numbers, but we believe we found and corrected the relevant formatting error, including font type and size.
Thank you for your input and especially the econometric suggestion. We hope to find a researcher who can supplement our next project with this background knowledge and regret not having it ourselves. Thank you!!
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper entitled “Dietary Power and Self-Determination among Female Farmers in Burkina Faso: A Proposal for a Food Consumption Agency Metric” is very well-written and proposes an interesting metric to measure agency within food systems, particularly focusing on agency over consumption. The authors have done an incredibly good job at explaining the relevant concepts and literature in the Introduction section. The aims of the paper are clear, the motivation is right, the topic is important and relevant to current challenges not only in Africa but other developing countries as well. Furthermore, the results are also interesting and shed new light on our understanding of agency over consumption.
That being said, I would like to highlight some of the shortcomings that I noticed in the manuscript. I would like the authors to consider my feedback and revise the paper accordingly:
- The calculation procedure of FCAM is not clear enough and needs to be elaborated further.
- The major concern about Food Consumption Agency Metric (FCAM) is the validity and reliability of this metric. There is no mention of face validity, content validity, construct validity, or reliability. How can the authors justify these concerns. I suggest the authors to look into it in greater depth and revise the paper.
- There is no account of limitations of this research (except for few line in the end of methods section). Please add this section and at the end (or maybe just a paragraph) and at least acknowledge the limitations other than the ones I mentioned above.
- It would interesting if authors also expand on future research directions in this area that how this metric can be better measured and integrated in the policy context.
Author Response
The scaling of the HFIAS and to FCAm numbers for the composite was separated into its own paragraph. The scaling of preference and worry was added explicitly to the methodology and not reserved for the discussion. The averaging explanation was expanded. Methods and research design were reorganized and expanded to comb over the step-by-step process for FCAM calculation.
We discuss the data’s reliability and explain the need for further studies using FCAM as this is the first time it’s been used so we cannot speak to its ability to produce reliable results yet because no one has tested the metric.
We discuss the limitations of the final results’ application to policy recommendations because FCAM has not been applied to other studies. We also discuss the limitations of the research further in the methodology. This discussion was also related to the reliability and validity discussion above
As per this suggestion and another reviewer, we discuss our hope to have FCAM evaluated under an econometric model.
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors present a very interesting study. As stated in the letter addressing the editor's concerns, the authors have made significant effort to improve the quality of their paper. It presents a study relating to seldom tackled issue of agency in the context of food security. In my opinion, a very important element of the study is the inclusion of the woman's position in the marriage and not only the wealth status.
I recommend publication of the paper in its current form.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your compliments. I have done another read-through and made some grammar tweaks to increase the readability.
Thank you!
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have provided satisfactory answers to the concerns raised by me in an earlier revision. I have no further comments. The paper can be accepted in its current form.
