Study of the Decoupling Patterns between Agricultural Development and Agricultural Carbon Emissions in Beijing Tianjin Hebei Region from 2000 to 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have given the comments. Please go through the comments 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

P1 1.The title contains an error in the title, where a hyphen should be replaced with a space. Reply：The hyphen has been replaced with space in thetitle. 2. Please rewrite this part as "The global challenges of climate change, including events such as droughts, floods, extreme weather conditions, and the spread of diseases caused by greenhouse gas emissions, have had significant impacts on both human society and production systems. As a result, finding effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and enhance the efficiency of carbon emissions has emerged as a prominent international concern and a crucial area of research (Fang et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2022). Reply：This part has been rewritten. 3.Please add reference Reply：Reference has been added. P2 4. Several studies, including those conducted by Li et al. (2023), Mohanad et al. (2018), and Arun et al. (2023), have found that the level of agricultural technology development has a significant effect on agricultural carbon emissions (ACE). These studies highlight the importance of technological advancements in agriculture for reducing carbon emissions and promoting sustainable practices. please rewrite this section Reply：This part has been rewritten. 5. author could add some more reference here. because just one reference could not justify the point Reply：Reference has been added. 6. He Huishuang and Fu Bangjie(2019) have measured the ACE of the main grain producing areas, finding the to-tal amount of agricultural carbon is increased slowly, but the carbon intensity is de-creased year by year; Reply：This part has been rewritten. This part is to express that the total amount of carbon emissions increases, but due to the increase in agricultural production, the emission intensity is reduced P3 1. Make it capital Reply：It has been modified. 2. Write it as Study Site. Reply：It has been modified. 3.please rewrite this section Reply：This part has been rewritten. P4 1.Figure is good Plz add climatic data of the study site of the study periods Reply：Figure has been modified. 2. from this I could not understand what methodology the follow. It seems some results ...please check it and rewrite this Reply：This part has been rewritten. P5 1 Does not require. Directly go to the methods ....... Reply：This part has been rewritten. P6 1. how you have calculated this one??????????????? Reply：This part has been rewritten and the carbon emission coefficients of each carbon emission type has added as table 2. 2.Till now calculated or what??? Reply：This part has been rewritten and the carbon emission coefficients of each carbon emission type has added as table 2. 3.what is C Reply：C has been modified into ACEQ. P7 1. mention the reference Reply：Reference has been added. P12 1. Discussion will come first and then Conclusions and recommendations. SO please do accordingly Reply：the discussion has been rewritten. 2 Discussion part is written poorly. Please re write this section and I could not find any reference here. Please add some reference/ Reply：the discussion has been rewritten. 3. Before & is this coma requiring???????? Reply：This part has been rewritten.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

a)     The complete form of ACEQ is not stated in the abstract section, which makes it difficult for readers to understand the term.

b)      The phrase "Mosier et al. (1998) maintain that crops and animals" is an example given in the first paragraph of the literature review section. It appears that the word maintain is not appropriate here.

c)      The statement “Ahmed et al. have analyzed the impact of food production on ACE in two countries, i.e., China (Ahmed et al., 2021) and Pakistan (Ahmed et al.,2021)" in the literature review section is confusing.

d)      The use of "And' it the beginning of the sentence in the third line of the first paragraph of section 3.1 seems inappropriate.

e)      The purpose of the numbers mentioned in the bracket after the citations in the second paragraph of section 3.3.2 "(Min and Hu,2012)[36]and (Min and Hu,2012;Xie et al.,2021;Ning et al.,2023) [36-38]" is not clear.

f)       The usage of both AD and Ad in section 4.1 is not clear. The use of the words low and lower in the seventh line of the same section is confusing.

g)      The use of the term "highest source" in the first paragraph of section 4.2 is doubtful.

h)      The citation "Grossman and Krueger (1991)" that is mentioned in the first paragraph of introduction differs from the one that is listed in the references. Can you comment on this disparity?

i)        The references list does not contain the citation "(Vander et al., 2021)" that was mentioned in the second paragraph of introduction.

 

 

 

  4. Minor revisions:

a)      Clarify abbreviations upon first usage.

b)      Consider providing a clearer link between specific agricultural practices/policies adopted within different cities that contributed significantly towards improving or worsening both AD levels and reducing/increasing carbon emission respectively.

c)      Discuss potential limitations associated with data availability or reliability as well as any mitigation strategies employed during data collection/analysis processes.

d)      Ensure consistency throughout manuscript with respect to formatting style guidelines such as capitalization conventions for headings/subheadings.

 

e)      Proofread throughout document for any grammatical errors or typographical mistakes that may have been overlooked during initial drafting stages.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of english language is   required

Author Response

a)The complete form of ACEQ is not stated in the abstract section, which makes it difficult for readers to understand the term. Reply：the ACEQ has been explained. b) The phrase "Mosier et al. (1998) maintain that crops and animals" is an example given in the first paragraph of the literature review section. It appears that the word maintain is not appropriate here. Reply：maintain has been modified to state c) The statement “Ahmed et al. have analyzed the impact of food production on ACE in two countries, i.e., China (Ahmed et al., 2021) and Pakistan (Ahmed et al.,2021)" in the literature review section is confusing. Reply：This part has been rewritten as follows. Ahmed et al. have analyzed the impact of food production on ACE in two countries: China and Pakistan (Ahmed et al.,2021), revealing a negative relationship between ACE and food production. d)The use of "And' it the beginning of the sentence in the third line of the first paragraph of section 3.1 seems inappropriate. Reply：This part has been removed. e)The purpose of the numbers mentioned in the bracket after the citations in the second paragraph of section 3.3.2 "(Min and Hu,2012)[36]and (Min and Hu,2012;Xie et al.,2021;Ning et al.,2023) [36-38]" is not clear. Reply：This part has been removed. f) The usage of both AD and Ad in section 4.1 is not clear. The use of the words low and lower in the seventh line of the same section is confusing. Reply：This part has been rewritten. g) The use of the term "highest source" in the first paragraph of section 4.2 is doubtful. Reply：This part has been rewritten as follows. The next major sources h)The citation "Grossman and Krueger (1991)" that is mentioned in the first paragraph of introduction differs from the one that is listed in the references. Can you comment on this disparity? i)The references list does not contain the citation "(Vander et al., 2021)" that was mentioned in the second paragraph of introduction. 4. Minor revisions: a)Clarify abbreviations upon first usage. Reply：This part has been added. b)Consider providing a clearer link between specific agricultural practices/policies adopted within different cities that contributed significantly towards improving or worsening both AD levels and reducing/increasing carbon emission respectively. Reply：Reference has been added. c)Discuss potential limitations associated with data availability or reliability as well as any mitigation strategies employed during data collection/analysis processes. Reply：This part has been added in the discussion.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research issues discussed in the article are interesting and important and consistent with the concept of sustainable development, which is so important for current and future generations. In the conclusions, it would be good to summarize all the achievements contained in the article. In the discussion of the results, in addition to the general synthesis of the results, it would be good for the authors to refer to the theory regarding a given issue and the research of other authors. Moreover, the authors could indicate what new it brings to the scientific achievements in a given topic and what are the limitations of the study. It is possible to indicate similarities and differences between the research results obtained and the research results of other authors. The article requires editorial correction, including: regarding the font size used in the study, the use of capital letters in Chapter 3. Study area and research methods.

Author Response

The research issues discussed in the article are interesting and important and consistent with the concept of sustainable development, which is so important for current and future generations. In the conclusions, it would be good to summarize all the achievements contained in the article. In the discussion of the results, in addition to the general synthesis of the results, it would be good for the authors to refer to the theory regarding a given issue and the research of other authors. Moreover, the authors could indicate what new it brings to the scientific achievements in a given topic and what the limitations of the study are. It is possible to indicate similarities and differences between the research results obtained and the research results of other authors. The article requires editorial correction, including regarding the font size used in the study, the use of capital letters in Chapter 3. Study area and research methods. Replay: Thank you for your valuable review comments on the manuscript. We have made the necessary revisions according to your comments, and the discussion has been rewritten.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The MS is in order. It may be accepted in present form.