The Role of Procedural Fairness: Land Titling Programs and Agricultural Investment in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The research investigates the effects of Land Titling Programs on Agricultural Investment in China, while also evaluating the moderating influence of Procedural Fairness. This topic is very interesting, and the manuscript is well-written. I find the reading experience enjoyable. The theoretical framework and proposed hypotheses appear robust. The data presented and the methodologies employed are easy to comprehend. I believe the manuscript is suitable for acceptance in its present state. Nevertheless, I would recommend that the authors include a discussion addressing the limitations of this study and elucidate the global applicability of the primary findings.

 

Author Response

Comments 1: The research investigates the effects of Land Titling Programs on Agricultural Investment in China, while also evaluating the moderating influence of Procedural Fairness. This topic is very interesting, and the manuscript is well-written. I find the reading experience enjoyable. The theoretical framework and proposed hypotheses appear robust. The data presented and the methodologies employed are easy to comprehend. I believe the manuscript is suitable for acceptance in its present state. Nevertheless, I would recommend that the authors include a discussion addressing the limitations of this study and elucidate the global applicability of the primary findings.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have added the limitations of this study in 4.4 and added a statement on the global applicability of the conclusions of this study in 5.2.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It seems that the topic is well structured and well explained. Consequently, I could not find the weaknesses in this paper.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments 1: It seems to me that the equation (21) should be written in the following manner

 

Where ? is the number of independent variables.

The same notification is for the equation (23).

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have revised equations (21), (22) and (23) in 3.3.

 

Comments 2: It seems that in the chapter “4. Results and discussion” the potential weaknesses of the method were not discussed as well as the potential improvement of proposed model and its possibilities for improvement.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have added the limitations of this study in 4.4 to discuss potential weaknesses of the method and the potential improvement of proposed model.

 

Comments 3: Is the statement” However, if the land titling process is not fair and the fruits of land titling are captured by elites, this will weaken farmers' confidence in the land titling program and their perceived security of land tenure, making it difficult for land titling to have an incentive effect on investment.” Based on the exact results of hypothesis testing or it is comprehensive conclusion?

Response 3: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have revised this statement to “However, if the land titling process is not fair, this will weaken farmers' confidence in the land titling program and their perceived security of land tenure, making it difficult for land titling to have an incentive effect on investment.” to make it more consistent with the empirical results based on hypothesis testing.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Your article deserves high praise. Some recommendations you can see in the attachment.

Kind regards!

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments 1: 4.1. the results prove hypothesis 1. You can complement the results with the impact of the other variables on investment activity, based on the data presented in Table 3 and Table 4 (structure, terrain, region, economic conditions, etc.). 4.2. the results prove hypothesis 2, but you could interpret the data presented in Table 5 and Table 6 in more depth.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have added an explanation of how other variables affect investment activities in 4.1. At the same time, we have also made a more in-depth analysis in 4.2, emphasizing that the openness and transparency of land titling programs are particularly important.

 

Comments 2: The conclusion nicely reflects the results of the analysis on improving security of tenure, but I think it would improve the paper if it were expanded. Present the results of the analysis in more detail in the final section. Make more detailed policy recommendations to local and national authorities. The title of the article points to the property rights-investment link. Provide more conclusions and recommendations on how to develop investment activity. How would the land market develop under improved "procedural fairness".

Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with comment. Therefore, we have expanded the conclusion and implications. We have added more details of our findings in 5.1 and more policy recommendations for local and national authorities in 5.2, with a particular emphasis on how to promote agricultural investment. In the last paragraph of 5.2, we also analyze how credit and land markets can be developed by improving the procedural fairness of land titling programs.