Assessment of the Coupling Degree between Agricultural Modernization and the Coordinated Development of Black Soil Protection and Utilization: A Case Study of Heilongjiang Province
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper focuses on the nexus of agricultural modernization and black soil protection in Heilongjiang, China. The relationship between agricultural modernization and land protection is an important academic question, which has not been researched much in existing literature. In this sense, this paper makes an important contribution to the literature. Overall, the paper is, written with clarity, properly designed, and generates interesting findings. I have a few suggestions for the authors to improve their paper.
1. First of all, the key concepts in the paper need to be further clarified. Agricultural modernization encompasses multiple meanings, including, land scale, inputs, industrialization of farming process, among others. The authors should clearly define what agricultural modernization means in their paper and explain why.
2. Theoretical framework. The authors state that they use coupling framework, and did not give more explanations on how do they frame the coupling between agricultural modernization and land protection. This is very important for understanding how they set the indicators and integrate them together.
3. Literature. The authors provided some literature on the topic, but most of the literature is China-based, without referring to studies from other countries or regions. Some literature of coupling studies on agricultural modernization and land/ecological issues should be discussed.
4. The results part. I think the results part can be improved by more clearly list the major findings, like giving some 1, 2,3 bullet points. Now, the results parts look like presenting in a random way.
5. The policy part. In section 4, the authors discussed the possible policy solution to improve the coordination of agricultural modernization and land protection. While useful to some degree, these policy solutions should be based on some theoretical foundations, for instance based on the framework that you propose in the section of theoretical framework. This will make the whole paper more coherent and stronger.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe quality of the language is acceptable, but there are still some typos and grammatical errors in the text, which the authors should carefully address in the further revisions.
Author Response
Dear Professor：
Thank you very much for your rigorous and patient advice. Please refer to the attachment for modifications. Thank you again for your help and valuable time.
Cheers!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAgricultural management includes various factors such as agricultural modernization and land protection and use. The authors focused on Heilongjiang province in China to address the gap that these factors are rarely considered simultaneously. The purpose of this study was to promote the sustainable development of agricultural modernization and the protection and use of black soil. The authors examined the less explored factors in the current black soil policy imposed by China and provide important insights into agricultural modernization. The study is well conducted, and the methods used are appropriate. The data is presented clearly. These findings will be of interest to researchers and extension workers, etc., in the field.
I have the following minor concerns.
1) The section name used in this paper is incorrect. Section “3. Case study” and “4. Coordinated development model” should be a part of “3. Results.”
2) P.1L.15 P.2L.86 P.3L.105 L.108 L.109 L.113 L.123 L.126 L.132 L133 L.199 P.12 L.449 P.17 L.618 L.627 L.632 P.18 L.644 L.648 This is a typographical error. A space is necessary between words or sentences.
3) P.1L.29 This is a grammatical error in English. “and” is necessary before “recognized.”
4) P.2L.49 This is a grammatical error in English. “in” is necessary after “resulted.”
5) P.2L.84 P.3L.144 This is a typographical error. A space is unnecessary at the end of the sentence.
6) P.5Table 1 Unnecessary line should be deleted at the end of P.5.
7) P.6L.224 This is a typographical error. “stud“ should be revised to ”study.”
8) P.6L.230 This is a typographical error. “The” should be revised to “To.”
9) P.6L.235 This is a typographical error. “iit” should be revised to “it.”
10) P.7 L.243-252 Numbered list “(1), (2), (3), (4), (5)” should be revised to “1., 2., 3., 4., 5.” according to the template of “Land.”
11) P.8 L.277 Table 2 “co scheduling” should be revised to “co-scheduling.”
12) P.9L.331-341 386-392 L.395-402 This is a typographical error. Font size is small.
13) P.10L.354 P.11L.392 L397 P.12L414 L421 L426 P.13L485 P.16L564 This is a typographical error. Unnecessary parentheses should be deleted.
14) P.10L.378 P.13L466 This is a grammatical error in English. “compared to” should be revised to “than.”
15) P.11Figure 1 Caption “(a) (b)” should be added to Figure 1. There is a typographical error. “Haerbin” should be revised to “Harbin” in the right figure.
16) P.11L.389 “Figure 1” is missing after “in”, which should be described.
17) P.12L.418 This is a typographical error. “On” should be revised to “on.”
18) P.14L.490-491 P.16L570 Each word in the figure title should begin with a lowercase character after the first word.
19) P.16L.590 Because this sentence includes a participle syntax, a comma is required before “considering.”
20) P.17L.616 This is a grammatical error in English. “and coupled the development of” should be revised to “coupled with the development of.”
21) P.18L.646 “and” should be added before “formulate.”
Author Response
Dear Professor：
Thank you very much for your rigorous and patient advice. Please refer to the attachment for modifications. Thank you again for your help and valuable time.Please see attachment.
Cheers！
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI have checked the revision report and the revised text, I think the authors have done a great job and sufficiently addressed my comments in the first review. Therefore, I recommend to publish this paper.
