Analysis of Farm Household Livelihood Sustainability Based on Improved IPAT Equation: A Case Study of 24 Counties in 3 Cities in the Qin-Ba Mountain Region of Southern Shaanxi

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

The article is interesting and the subject of the paper fits the field of interest of LAND. The manuscript addresses an important issue of livelihood sustainability. Questions have been raised about: 1. how did you estimate parameters H, P, A, C, and T in equation 5, explain it in methodology, please; 2. how do farmers implement a green livelihood? Is there one way only changing their livelihood strategies; by only searching for other sources of income? And what is the meaning of agriculture here? The example of Hanzhong's development policy is particularly valuable here. 

There are errors regarding technical requirements in the manuscript. Please read it carefully again.

Row 41  „… Chambers et al. pointed out that…” reference is missing.

Best regards

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments

Dear Reviewers,

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

Thanks again!

 

Point 1:how did you estimate parameters H, P, A, C, and T in equation 5, explain it in methodology, please;

Response 1:Thank you for your comment. The manuscript constructs the IPHACT framework by improving the classic IPAT equation, and converts IPHACT into a random model. The transformed random model is logarithmically processed to obtain formula 5.

I (livelihood output environmental impact) = H (livelihood strategy) × P (livelihood subject) × A (livelihood needs) × T (livelihood benefits)

(5)

The process of parameter estimation is as follows:

In equation (5), I represents the environmental impact of the farm household livelihood output; H represents the group characteristics; P is the number of household population; A represents the farm household livelihood needs; C represents the livelihood sustainability of different livelihood strategy groups. The coefficients of the driving forces (b, c, d, c, t) represent the percentage of environmental change caused by a change of 1% in the driving forces (H, P, A, C, T) if other factors remain constant, this is similar to the elasticity approach in economics. If the coefficient (b, c, d, t) is equal to 1, then the relationship between environmental influence and driving force (H, P, A, C, T) is monotonously proportional, it is indicated that the acceleration of environmental change caused by increasing this human factor exceeds the change speed of driving force; if it is greater than 0 and less than 1, this indicates that the increase in the human factor causes environmental change to accelerate at a lower rate than the rate of change of the driving force; if less than 0, it indicates that the increase in the human factor has the effect of mitigating environmental impacts. Based on the available survey data of villages and towns in Ankang, Shangluo and Hanzhong in the qinling-bashan mountains, the entropy method was used to process the data, that is, cluster analysis was carried out by SPSS Software and the related parameters were standardized. Secondly, in Formula (5) , ln (I) as dependent variable, ln(H)、ln(P)、ln(A)、ln(C)、ln(T) , ln (T) as independent variable, a as constant term, regression analysis was carried out on the model after treatment.

 

Point 2:how do farmers implement a green livelihood? Is there one way only changing their livelihood strategies; by only searching for other sources of income? And what is the meaning of agriculture here?

Response 2: Thanks very much for your comment. Regarding your comment, we have added ways to achieve green livelihoods and the significance of agriculture on the basis of the manuscript. The specific modifications are as follows:

• Green livelihoodis kind of sustainable livelihood that do not harm the natural environmental base. Green livelihood capital is a kind of capital that farmers in ecologically fragile areas can depend on. The relationship between green livelihood capital and ecological environment and natural resources is mutual dependence. Sustainable development can not endanger the natural environment foundation. Interventions for livelihood promotion and development should focus on reducing greater reliance on the environment. By changing livelihood strategies, strengthening environmental awareness and innovating mode of production, farmers can improve natural capital efficiency and rebuild green livelihood capital.
• Agricultureis the support for farmers to choose livelihood strategy. The output of farmers livelihood will have an impact on natural resources and agricultural environment. The more dependent on natural resources, the greater the "negative feedback" on agricultural environment. The sustainable livelihood should not endanger the foundation of the natural environment. How to achieve green livelihoods is closely related to agricultural development, and improving the sustainable livelihoods has great significance for agricultural development.

 

Point 3：There are errors regarding technical requirements in the manuscript. Please read it carefully again. Row 41  „… Chambers et al. pointed out that…” reference is missing.

Response 3:Thank you very much for your comments. We checked the references carefully and made technical modifications to the manuscript. Supplementary references are as follows：

2. Chambers Ian,Roberts John,Urbaniak Suzy. Education for Sustainable Development: A Study in Adolescent Perception Changes Towards Sustainability Following a Strategic Planning-Based Intervention—The Young Persons’ Plan for the Planet Program. Sustain,2019,11,26-45.doi:10.1080

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. In addition, we have modified the format to meet the requirements of LAND. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

The article concerns the analysis of Farm Household Livelihood Sustainability Based on Improved IPAT Equation.

 

The strengths of the manuscript are:

• choice of topic, I think it is current and very interesting,

• they are own research financed by a grant,

• correctly selected statistical methods,

• broadly described implications for the economy.

 

The weakness of the manuscript is:

• the Introduction lacks information about which sections the article consists of,

• in the introduction, please clearly state what is the purpose of the article,

• no Discussion section,

• add DOI numbers of articles in the list of references.

 

I have no more comments. After formatting the article according to the theme, the article can be published.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Dear Reviewers,

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

Thanks again!

 

Point 1：In the introduction, please clearly state what is the purpose of the article.

Response 1:Thank you very much for your comment. The purpose of the article is to modify it as follows:

The goal of this paper is to analyze the key factors that affect farmers' output and livelihood sustainability, as well as the differences in the role of factors among different livelihood strategy groups, and to explore the relationship between livelihood output and livelihood sustainability.On the basis of these, the paper explores the direct or indirect environmental impacts of reducing dependence on natural capital, reducing livelihood activities and strategies, and improving livelihood strategy to effectively enhance sustainable livelihood .In order to illustrate the practical guiding significance of the theoretical analysis framework, this paper builds the IHPACT framework based on the IPAT classical equation to analyze and explore the factors that affect livelihood sustainability, as well as the intervention and regulation pathways to achieve livelihood sustainability. The empirical analysis is conducted using the Qin-ba Mountain area in southern Shaanxi as an example.

 

Point2：The Introduction lacks information about which sections the article consists of.

Response 2:Thank you very much for your comments. Based on the content and framework of the manuscript, the components in the introduction are supplemented as follows:

Based on the above research objectives, the section 2 introduces the main research progress of the IPAT classical formula and expands the analytical framework. The section 3 conducts the result analysis and compares the differences in the roles of different regions and livelihood strategy groups. The section 5 and section 6 are discussion and conclusion, proposing policy recommendations and future development directions for sustainable livelihoods.

 

Point 3：no Discussion section,

Response 3:Thank you very much for your comment. Based on the research content, we have made some adjustments to the structure of the manuscript. The discussion section has been modified as follows:

Research on livelihoods has been an important subject of sustainable environmental management. Increasing research on sustainable livelihoods can improve the ability of farmers ,so that they can respond their livelihood strategy to deal with risks and strengthen their livelihood capacity.

    (1) Through analysis of the survey area, we found that pure farmers and part-time households have a significant impact on the environment. The reasons are as follows: pure farmers and one-part-families are mostly elderly, and their educational level and transportation conditions limit their livelihood choices. Young people choose to leave their homes and work outside, which ultimately lead to the abandonment of arable land and the stagnation of rural development. The government of Hanzhong City has taken great foresight and developed a distinctive tourism industry to provide diverse livelihood choices for young and elderly people. In the future, the government should pay more attention to road construction in remote rural areas and provide skill training services for the remaining population, cultivating a sense of sustainable development,and comprehensively promote the construction of ecological civilization, practice the "dual carbon" goal, and achieve sustainable development.

(2) We selected the ecologically fragile area of Qinba Mountain in southern Shaanxi and found that farmers in the survey area rely heavily on the natural environment. Local farmers consume natural resources too quickly, resulting in a worse fragile ecological environment. This paper analyzes the factors that affect sustainable livelihoods and provides policy recommendations for local farmers to achieve green transformation of their livelihood strategies.Through the study of typical eco-vulnerable areas, it can provide some ideas and relevant reference for the areas in developing countries that rely on ecological environment.

(3) IPAT model is a classical theory to study environmental impact, and has been well applied in carbon emissions, agricultural non-point source pollution, water footprint and other aspects. This article improves the IPAT model and applies it to the theoretical modeling of environmental factors affecting farmers. The framework expands the application scope of the IPAT model and also fills the gap in theoretical modeling research on the environmental impact of farmers' livelihood output. On this basis, this study can be further expanded to explore the sustainability of rural households' livelihood and environmental impact, and also discuss and compare the application of the improved IPAT model in the sustainable livelihood of residents based on registered residence classification, providing theoretical and model support for the long-term improvement of environmental protection and livelihood capacity.

 

Point 4：add DOI numbers of articles in the list of references.

Response 4: Thank you very much for your comment. The manuscript has been added DOI numbers in the list of references.

 

 

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. In addition, we have modified the format to meet the requirements of LAND. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting study. Based on primary survey data, the authors used the IPHACT framework to explore the sustainability of farmers' livelihoods. Overall, the topic selection has some significance, but the logical structure and design of the whole study is a little rough. Specific suggestions are as follows:

         (1) The logical structure of the article needs to be adjusted. The first part is the introduction, the second part suggests theoretical analysis and research hypothesis, the third part suggests data and methods (including variable measurement), the fourth part is the result analysis, the fifth part is the discussion, and the sixth part is the conclusion and policy enlightenment. Now the logical structure is a bit confusing, if you don't look carefully, you can't see the core part of the article.

         (2) Where was the analysis framework used in the study? What are the core independent and dependent variables? What is the core approach? Now these contents are scattered in various parts of the article, it is suggested to unify. In addition, compared with existing studies, it seems unclear where the marginal contribution of this study is.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 3 Comments

Dear Reviewers,

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

Thanks again!

 

Point 1：The logical structure of the article needs to be adjusted. Now the logical structure is a bit confusing, if you don't look carefully, you can't see the core part of the article.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comment! Based on your suggestions and research content, we have made corresponding adjustments to the logical structure of the manuscript.

 

Point 2：Where was the analysis framework used in the study? What are the core independent and dependent variables? What is the core approach? Now these contents are scattered in various parts of the article, it is suggested to unify. In addition, compared with existing studies, it seems unclear where the marginal contribution of this study is.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your comments. The core framework of this article is the IPHACT equation constructed based on the classic IPAT. We have integrated the logical structure of the manuscript and made specific structural adjustments as follows:

(1)The core framework of this article is as follows:

IPAT is a widely accepted model of population, economy, energy and environment, which synthetically reflects the development of livelihood, environment and society. In this paper, the classic IPAT model combined with multiple linear regression analysis, prediction. In formula (1) , I stands for environmental impact; P for population; a for affluence; and T for skill.

I =P × A × T

(1)

There are some limitations in the analysis of the IPAT equation due to the brevity of the selection of human factors on the right. The variation of factors in IPAT equation shows a certain proportion, but it does not show a certain proportion in practical application, which limits the application of IPAT equation in many fields. Comparing the connotation of livelihood and sustainable livelihood, we can find that the livelihood activities are individual or family-based (p) , in order to realize the livelihood needs (A, GDP_t) , after the balance between the endowment of livelihood capital (L) and the livelihood benefit (T, GDP_t/L) , the livelihood output (I) is obtained by determining the livelihood strategy. At the same time, as for the individual, because of the differences of livelihood strategy choice (GDP_aGDP_t) , Livelihood Capital Endowment, and livelihood efficiency, the environmental impact of individual livelihood activities (focusing on the Natural capital of livelihood capital) is magnified by the number of people (p) such as families, communities, and regions, thus affecting the local or regional high-quality sustainable development. Based on the classic IPAT equation in Formula (1) , the analytical framework of livelihood sustainability can be obtained as follows:

I (livelihood output environmental impact) = H (livelihood strategy) × P (livelihood subject) × A (livelihood needs) × T (livelihood benefits)

(2)

When I pay attention to the Natural capital of farmers, it can represent the environmental impact of farmers’livelihood output, while the group characteristics of H reflect the differences in livelihood strategies, c is introduced as an indicator of livelihood sustainability for different livelihood strategy groups, expressed as the ratio of Natural capital to livelihood capital, T as livelihood benefit, H as the type of farmer households, P as the number of family members, the above-mentioned framework for the sustainability analysis of livelihoods could be further reformulated to read:

I (natural capital) = h (livelihood strategy group) x P (group population) x A (livelihood needs) x C (natural capital share of livelihood capital) x T (livelihood benefits)

(3)

As the main economic activity subject and basic decision-making unit in rural areas, the input of livelihood capital and the choice of livelihood strategies are closely related to the livelihood benefits of rural households. Farmers’livelihood benefits are closely related to their livelihood activities, and farmers who choose different livelihood activities (H) , for example, there are differences in the ways and intensities of natural resource use among pure farmers, one-household households, two-household households and non-agricultural Natural capital, the irrational way of livelihood adopted by farmers directly leads to the destruction of the natural environment, which reduces the area of forests and grasslands, and affects the species diversity and ecological restoration function of wetlands, the large-scale consumption of resources and the change of natural environment have changed the impact on the environment, and the livelihood benefit has been reduced, which leads to the serious threat to the sustainable development of farmers’ivelihood. The difference analysis of the environmental impact of different livelihood strategy groups can be obtained by the change of farmer household type H, that is:

∆I=(h1m - h2m +∆hnm) x P x Cx T

(4)

Among them, I was the difference of environmental impact under different livelihood strategies, h₁^m and h₂^m were the two livelihood strategies to be compared, and _∆hnm was the rebound effect. In order to further examine the impact of factors affecting farmers’ivelihood output, IPHACT was transformed into a random model based on the above formula. The transformed stochastic model is treated with logarithm, and the expression is as follows:

I (livelihood output environmental impact) = H (livelihood strategy) × P (livelihood subject) × A (livelihood needs) × T (livelihood benefits)

(5)

In equation (5) , I represents the environmental impact of the farm household’livelihood output; H represents the group characteristics; P is the number of household population; a represents the farm household’s livelihood needs; C represents the livelihood sustainability of different livelihood strategy groups. From the above analysis, the main factors affecting the farmers’livelihood output include the farmers’livelihood needs, the sustainability of their livelihoods, the characteristics of farmers and technological progress. In general, the main factors affecting the livelihood needs of rural households are per capita household disposable income. The main factors affecting the characteristics of rural households are the size and type of rural households. In Formula (5) , ln (I) as dependent variable, ln(H)、ln(P)、ln(A)、ln(C)、ln(T) , ln (T) as independent variable, a as constant term, regression analysis was carried out on the model after treatment.

• Regarding marginal contribution, our supplement is as follows:Based on the classic IPAT equation, this article constructs an analytical framework for analyzing and exploring the factors that affect livelihood sustainability, as well as the interference and regulation pathways to achieve livelihood sustainability. This enriches the application of the improved IPAT model in the field of green and sustainable livelihoods for residents, compensates for the shortcomings of domestic research in modeling the environmental impact of farmers' livelihood output, and provides theoretical and model support for environmental protection and long-term improvement of livelihood capabilities.

 

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. In addition, we have modified the format to meet the requirements of LAND. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 4 Report

1. Limited geographical scope: The study is limited to the Qin-ba Mountain area of southern Shaanxi Province and may not be representative of other regions with different ecological and socio-economic conditions.

2. Small sample size: The study sample consists of only 24 counties and districts, which may not be sufficient to generalize the findings to the entire region.

3. Reliance on self-reported data: The study relies on self-reported data from farmers, which may be subject to social desirability bias and recall bias.

4. Lack of consideration of external factors: The study does not consider external factors that may influence the relationship between livelihood sustainability and environmental impact, such as government policies and market forces.

5. Limited focus on livelihood strategies: While the study analyzes the impact of different livelihood strategies on environmental sustainability, it does not provide an in-depth analysis of the factors that influence farmers' livelihood strategy choices.

6. Limited focus on cultural and social factors: While the study mentions the potential influence of cultural and social factors on livelihood sustainability, it does not provide a detailed analysis of their impact on the relationship between livelihood sustainability and environmental impact.

7. To improve the content of the article following are some of the suggested articles for reading and citing. (These articles are from various renowned scholars in the relevant filed).

8. a. Drivers of climate variability and increasing water salinity impacts on the farmer’s income risk with future outlook mitigation. 

9. b. Non-agricultural labor transfer, factor allocation and farmland yield: Evidence from the part-time peasants in Loess Plateau region of Northwest China.
10. c. Estimating farmers’ willingness to pay for photovoltaic industry to improve agricultural green resources and environment.
11. d. Screening of agricultural land productivity and returning farmland to forest area for sensitivity to rural labor outward migration in the ecologically fragile Loess Plateau region.

 

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 4 Comments

Dear Reviewers,

Thanks very much for taking your time to review this manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Please find my itemized responses in below and my revisions/corrections in the re-submitted files.

Thanks again!

 

Point 1：Limited geographical scope: The study is limited to the Qin-ba Mountain area of southern Shaanxi Province and may not be representative of other regions with different ecological and socio-economic conditions.Small sample size: The study sample consists of only 24 counties and districts, which may not be sufficient to generalize the findings to the entire region.Reliance on self-reported data: The study relies on self-reported data from farmers, which may be subject to social desirability bias and recall bias.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your comment. The explanation for sample size is as follows：

Shaanxi province is about 880 kilometers long from north to south and 160-490 kilometers wide from east to west. As a large agricultural province, Shaanxi has formed a relatively perfect agricultural system, with a strong representation, however, in the industrial development at the same time, the destruction of natural resources is also greater. In particular, farmers, who are the main producers of agricultural products, engage in unscientific breeding and over-production, which lead to the degradation of local natural resources, reduction of natural capital and changes in livelihood benefits.Due to the influence of the epidemic situation, the distribution of the questionnaire is scattered as far as possible, and the representative survey points are selected to reflect the reality of the theme of the article. In the process of setting, distributing and recycling the questionnaire, we try our best to set up a scientific index system and a strict process of filling in and recycling, and try our best to avoid the deviation of social expectation and recall.

Based on your suggestion, we have added a supplementary description of the survey area in the manuscript：The Qin-ba Mountains in southern Shaanxi province include the cities of Ankang, Hanzhong and Shangluo. The southern Shaanxi province is located in the hinterland of qinling-bashan mountain area, with poor transportation and low economic development level. As an investigation area with a large proportion of agricultural output, it has a high dependence on natural resources and ecological environment. The study area covers a larger area, covers a wider area, involving a variety of livelihoods. At the same time, the composition of local peasant households includes four types of pure peasant households, one-part-household, two-part-household and non-peasant households, farmers’livelihood strategies can provide strong reference. In addition, in the light of the comments of the reviewers, we have added details of the survey area:

Table1 Survey area and questionnaire distribution

Regional	County/district	counties/districts	Effective copy	Proportion
Ankang	Xunyang, Baihe, Shiquan, Pingli, Ziyang, Langao, Ningshan, Zhenping, Hanyin	9	173	26.9%
Hanzhong	Nanzheng, Chenggu, Yangxian, Mianxian, Xixiang, Lueyang, Zhenba, Ningqiang, Liuba, Foping	9	187	29.2%
Shangluo	Zhen'an, Danfeng, Shangnan, Luonan, Shanyang, Zhashui	6	282	43.9%

However, this suggestion inspired us to explore heterogeneity based on different types of farmers in different regions. Considering the difficulty of data collection, we will conduct empirical investigation and research in this area in further research. Thank you again for your comment!

 

Point 2: Lack of consideration for external factors: This study did not consider external factors that may affect the relationship between livelihood sustainability and environmental impacts, such as government policies and market forces.

Response 2:Thank you very much for your comments. Government policies and market forces are important external factors that affect the link between livelihood sustainability and environmental impacts, which are indispensable Macroeconomic regulation and control factors for farmers’livelihood strategies and environmental impacts. Based on the improved IPAT equation, this paper focuses on the micro-level to explore how the differences in the role of factors among different livelihood strategy groups have an impact on livelihood sustainability. Given the indispensable nature of external factors, this paper adds the following policy and market implications:

1.In terms of government policies, on the one hand,government departments can gradually establish or improve local non-agricultural industrial chains and provide more local employment opportunities for part-time farmers.On the other hand, the government department can adjust the development strategy, such as transforming idle land into tourist spots with distinctive natural landscape and cultural landscape according to its characteristics. Replacing the use of natural resources with a new approach makes green livelihoods more coordinated with sustainable development.

2.In terms of the market, Enterprises can transform resources into assets, funds into equity, and farmers into shareholders through agricultural cooperation reform. At the same time, they can also improve the efficiency of natural capital and reconstruct green livelihood capital by developing the understory economy, through methods such as forest poultry model, forest animal model, forest vegetable model, and forest grass model.

 

3. Limited attention to livelihood strategies: Although this study analyzed the impact of different livelihood strategies on environmental sustainability, there was no in-depth analysis of the factors affecting farmers' livelihood strategy choices.

Response 3:Thank you very much for your comment. Through investigation and development, it was found that the number of household labor force (P) and education level of labor force have a significant impact on farmers' choice of part-time livelihood strategies. Compared to the number of household labor force and education level of labor force, farmers have a stronger willingness to choose part-time livelihood strategies. In addition, the age and population size of the head of household have a greater impact on farmers' choice of non agricultural livelihood strategies. Farmers with younger heads of household tend to choose non agricultural livelihood strategies more, and younger farmers generally have higher levels of education and are more inclined to work outside. However, as the focus of this article is on studying the key factors that affect production output and livelihood sustainability, as well as the differences in the role of factors between different livelihood strategy groups, there has been no in-depth discussion on this issue. However, we will continue to delve deeper into this topic in future research. Thank you again for your comment.

 

4. Limited attention to cultural and social factors: Although this study mentions the potential impact of cultural and social factors on livelihood sustainability, it does not provide a detailed analysis of their impact on the relationship between livelihood sustainability and environmental impact.

Response 4: Thank you very much for your comments. The manuscript builds the IPHACT framework based on the IPAT classic equations. Ipat equation is a conceptual framework for analyzing human activities and environmental impacts. Through the relationship between the product of Population, Affluence and Technology and environmental Impact, the account identity between human factors and environmental factors is constructed. The IPHACT framework constructed in this paper is based on the relationship between environmental impacts and the product of five highly relevant factors: household size, group characteristics, farmers’livelihood needs, livelihood sustainability and livelihood benefits, this paper constructs the framework of livelihood and environmental factors, and focuses on the adjustment of livelihood activities, the transformation of livelihood behaviors, and the improvement of livelihood strategies on the environmental impact of livelihood practices. Cultural and social factors are also very important factors affecting sustainable livelihoods, however, the coverage of these two factors is complex and diverse, and more abstract, it is difficult to describe the parametric model. Second, the two factors to some extent imperceptible and evolving process, it may be necessary to use indicators to measure the cumulative effect of these factors over time. How to carry on the model construction and the index measurement to the two is still the important direction that we will work hard in the future. Thank you for your feedback and we will continue to conduct empirical research and research in this area in the context of further research on social organizations and institution. Thank you again for your comments!

 

We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. We appreciate for your warm work earnestly, and hope that the correction will meet with approval. In addition, we have modified the format to meet the requirements of LAND. Once again, thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I have no other comments, thank you.

Reviewer 4 Report

Should be accepted in present form.