Analysis of Cultivated Land Change and Its Driving Forces in Jiangsu Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors I've read the article entitled "Analysis of cultivated land change and its driving forces in Jiangsu Province, China". 

In addition, I do not believe the methods used are appropriate, and the study's purpose and rationale are unclear to me.

The authors should revise their methods and clarify their objective, in my opinion.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

    We greatly appreciate your effort and your valuable comments on our manuscript entitled “Analysis of cultivated land change and its driving forces in Jiangsu Province, China” (land-3442705). They are very helpful for us to improve our paper. We have studied all comments carefully and have made conscientious correction. We used word's revision mode to enable our modification traceable. The main corrections in the paper and the responds are as follows:

Comment: I've read the article entitled "Analysis of cultivated land change and its driving forces in Jiangsu Province, China". In addition, I do not believe the methods used are appropriate, and the study's purpose and rationale are unclear to me. The authors should revise their methods and clarify their objective, in my opinion.

Response: As one of the economically developed areas of China, Jiangsu Province has been challenged by limited land resources and a big population, especially under the current “new mode” with food security on the top agenda of the Chinese government. To find out the differences of land use change as well as the driving forces among the 13 regional cities of Jiangsu province, it is be possible to make more targeted policies and measures on land use protection.  

By using the statistical data of economic and social development of Jiangsu Province since 2000, the number of cultivated land protection policies issued and other variables, this paper creatively participated in multiple regression analysis of the economic, social and policy factors causing the change of cultivated land in Jiangsu Province. Finally, the spatial and temporal geographical weighted regression model was used to analyze the difference of cultivated land change in the 13 regional cities of the Province in the past 20 years.

This article focuses on cultivated land change and its driving factors in Jiangsu Province from 2000 to 2020, a topic with important practical background and policy implications. The aim of this study is to provide a scientific basis for formulating reasonable land use policies and ensuring food security by analyzing the characteristics and driving factors of cultivated land change. So this article is valuable to the government of Jiangsu Province.

We greatly appreciate the valuable comments and suggestions of the reviewers and responsible editors. They enabled us to improve the quality of our manuscript to be more in line with the publication requirements of the Journal. We hope that the revisions in the manuscript and our responses will be sufficient to make our manuscript suitable for publication in Land.

Thank you again for your advice.

 

 

With best wishes!

Xufeng Cao

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study focuses on cultivated land change and its driving factors in Jiangsu Province from 2000 to 2020, a topic with important practical background and policy implications. The aim of this study is to provide a scientific basis for formulating reasonable land use policies and ensuring food security by analyzing the characteristics and driving factors of cultivated land change.

In the introduction section, this study comprehensively reviewed the relevant literature on the analysis of the characteristics and influencing factors of land use change, which provided a solid theoretical foundation for the development of this study. At the same time, it also points out the shortcomings of the existing literature, that is, most studies only discuss the impact of urbanization on cultivated land use from the perspective of geography, and lack the economic analysis of the formation reasons. At the same time, most of the studies on the driving forces of land use change in the existing literature focus on the analysis of the influencing factors in the whole region, and there is a lack of research on the impact heterogeneity of different subdivisions in the region. As for the review of relevant studies, it is suggested to further strengthen the logical integrity of the review, for example, the correlation and differences between different studies can be more clearly sorted out, and how these studies support the innovation points and research methods of this study.

In the methods and data section, the selected methods were reasonable and could reveal the characteristics and driving factors of cultivated land change from different angles. The reliability and timeliness of the data are also high, which guarantees the accuracy of the research results. However, in terms of data processing, it is recommended to further explain how to deal with possible data errors and outliers in order to enhance the rigor of the research methodology

In the results and discussion section, the interpretation of some key indicators can be more detailed in the presentation of results. For example, the explanation of the coefficients and significance levels of various factors in the regression analysis can be combined with the specific research background and the actual situation for more in-depth analysis. In the discussion of the results, there is still room for further improvement, and the possible interaction and synergistic effect between these factors can be further discussed, as well as the long-term impact of these factors on the protection of cultivated land and food security in the future. In addition, the policy implications of the research results can be elaborated more specifically, and more targeted and operable policy recommendations can be put forward.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

    We greatly appreciate your effort and valuable comments on our manuscript entitled “Analysis of cultivated land change and its driving forces in Jiangsu Province, China” (land-3442705). They are very helpful for us to improve our paper. We have studied all comments carefully and have made conscientious correction. We used word's revision mode to enable modification traceable. The main corrections in the paper and the responds are as follows:

Comment 1: As for the review of relevant studies, it is suggested to further strengthen the logical integrity of the review, for example, the correlation and differences between different studies can be more clearly sorted out, and how these studies support the innovation points and research methods of this study.

Response: We have substantially revised our literature review. The relevant contents are summarized so as to look more concise. We also highlighted the driving forces for the impact of only human factors on cultivated land.

 

Comment 2: However, in terms of data processing, it is recommended to further explain how to deal with possible data errors and outliers in order to enhance the rigor of the research methodology.

Response: Stata 15.0 software was used to complete tasks such as data cleaning, outlier processing, standardization, and multicollinearity checking, so as to improve the rigor and reliability of regression analysis.

 

Comment 3: In the discussion of the results, there is still room for further improvement, and the possible interaction and synergistic effect between these factors can be further discussed, as well as the long-term impact of these factors on the protection of cultivated land and food security in the future. In addition, the policy implications of the research results can be elaborated more specifically, and more targeted and operable policy recommendations can be put forward.

Response: We have made some simplification of the independent variables in the regression analysis to exclude the effect of multicollinearity, and the model is more stable. We make an in-depth discussion on the influencing factors after simplification, and put forward more targeted and operational policy suggestions, such as the government should optimize land use planning, delimit permanent basic farmland protection zones, give priority to the use of existing construction land, and reduce the occupation of cultivated land.

Thank you again for your advice.

 

With best wishes!

Xufeng Cao

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I appreciate the opportunity to review the paper titled “Analysis of cultivated land change and its driving forces in Jiangsu Province, China.” After reviewing the paper, I think the authors did a good job covering relevant literature and providing the basis of their proposed study. However, there are a few methodological issues (listed below) that require the authors’ consideration.

 

1. One of the key assumptions of regression analysis is that the variables are normally distributed. I suggest the authors check the normality of the variables and apply appropriate transformation if needed.

 

2. In Table 1, the authors identified twelve driving factors as independent variables. I suspect some of them are highly related to one another. Potential issues of multicollinearity should be examined and addressed before carrying out the analysis.

 

3. In Table 7, please report the beta-weight as well.

 

4. Given there are 13 cities, Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) is not an appropriate method for such a small dataset. The authors should point out this limitation in the paper if they want to keep the GWR analysis and results.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

    We greatly appreciate your comments and suggestions on our manuscript entitled “Analysis of the Impact of Land Use Change on Grain Production in Jiangsu Province” (land-2754649). These comments are valuable and helpful for us to improve our paper. We have studied all comments carefully and have made corresponding correction. We used word's revision mode to make the modification traceable. The main corrections in the paper and the responds are as follows:

Comment 1: One of the key assumptions of regression analysis is that the variables are normally distributed. I suggest the authors check the normality of the variables and apply appropriate transformation if needed.

Response: Linear regression residuals are generally required to be approximately normally distributed. Here we use the swilk instruction of stata 15.0 software, and the results are as follows:

                   Shapiro-Wilk W test for normal data

      Variable |        Obs       W           V         z       Prob>z

-------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            e |        273     0.97886       4.144      3.322    0.00045

The value of W is close to 1, so the residuals are approximately normally distributed.

 

Comment 2: In Table 1, the authors identified twelve driving factors as independent variables. I suspect some of them are highly related to one another. Potential issues of multicollinearity should be examined and addressed before carrying out the analysis.

Response: We have streamlined the independent variables, and the current nine independent variables have VIF values less than 10. The current new model can rule out the multicollinearity problem.

               Variable                |       VIF       1/VIF  

---------------------------------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Agricultural output value                 |      8.13    0.123058

Total power of agricultural machinery       |      7.40    0.135117

Per capita housing area in rural areas       |      6.30    0.158653

Rate of urbanization                      |      4.85    0.206015

Real estate investments                   |      4.67    0.214304

Proportion of secondary industry employees |      3.73    0.267910

Proportion of tertiary industry employees    |      3.52    0.283755

Total population at end of year             |      2.27    0.441308

Cultivated land protection policies          |      1.05    0.952309

-----------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------

              Mean VIF                 |      4.66

 

Comment 3: In Table 7, please report the beta-weight as well.

Response: The beta is the regression coefficient and doesn’t have weight.

 

Comment 4: Given there are 13 cities, Geographically Weighted Regression (GWR) is not an appropriate method for such a small dataset. The authors should point out this limitation in the paper if they want to keep the GWR analysis and results.

Response: We used the GTWR method with 21 years of data for 13 cities, and the sample of observations reached 273. 

 

Thank you again for your advice.   

 

With best wishes,

Xufeng Cao

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Based on the in-depth study of land use change in Jiangsu Province from 2000 to 2020, this study analyzed in detail the decreasing trend of cultivated land area and the influence of multiple factors such as population growth, economic development, rural development and land policy. In this round of revision, the author has made great efforts to revise the article, but there are still some small problems that need to be further improved:

1 introduction: In the response to this manuscript, the author mentions that a large number of revisions have been made to the literature review, which enhances the logic and persuasion of the introduction. However, the connection between research question raising and literature review can be more natural and smoother to further improve the overall logical coherence.

2 methods and data sources: In this version of manuscript, positive responses have been made to the comments of reviewers, which enhances the scientific nature and credibility of the research. Of course, if some details can be further improved, it will be more perfect, for example, the details of the analysis method can be clearer and more specific, so that readers can better understand and evaluate the accuracy of the research.

3 results and discussion: Although the author has made positive responses to the reviewer's comments in this version, some aspects can still be further improved. For example, the authors can explore in more depth the interactions and synergies between different factors, as well as the long-term impact of these factors on arable land protection and food security. In addition, the policy recommendations section could be more specific and actionable, such as clarifying priority areas and specific measures for policy implementation.

Of course, these are further recommendations, as an academic journal paper, after this round of revisions basically meet the requirements for publication.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

    Thanks for your comments concern our manuscript entitled “Analysis of the Impact of Land Use Change on Grain Production in Jiangsu Province” (land-2754649) again. Those comments are valuable and helpful for further revising and improving our paper. We have studied all comments carefully and have made conscientious correction. We used word's revision mode, so the traces of modification are obvious. The main corrections in the paper and the responds are as follows:

Comment 1: introduction: In the response to this manuscript, the author mentions that a large number of revisions have been made to the literature review, which enhances the logic and persuasion of the introduction. However, the connection between research question raising and literature review can be more natural and smoother to further improve the overall logical coherence.

Response: According to the suggestions, the introduction part is modified, and the urbanization development is taken as the clue to raise the question and review the literature in series, so that the logic of the introduction is more smooth.

Comment 2: methods and data sources: In this version of manuscript, positive responses have been made to the comments of reviewers, which enhances the scientific nature and credibility of the research. Of course, if some details can be further improved, it will be more perfect, for example, the details of the analysis method can be clearer and more specific, so that readers can better understand and evaluate the accuracy of the research.

Response: According to the suggestions, the section of analysis method and data source has been modified. The introduction of transfer matrix analysis method has been strengthened. The content of remote sensing data acquisition method and accuracy has been added. The statistical description table has been added for dependent variables.

Comment 3: results and discussion: Although the author has made positive responses to the reviewer's comments in this version, some aspects can still be further improved. For example, the authors can explore in more depth the interactions and synergies between different factors, as well as the long-term impact of these factors on arable land protection and food security. In addition, the policy recommendations section could be more specific and actionable, such as clarifying priority areas and specific measures for policy implementation.

Response: The synergistic effect of urbanization and economic development on cropland reduction is discussed according to the suggestions. Urbanization drives the development of real estate industry and its related construction and material industries, thus also drives the development of economy. The superposition of the two plays an important role in cultivated land reduction. In the part of policy suggestions, it is clearly proposed that the most important thing for cultivated land protection is to plan permanent basic farmland protection zone, and strengthen and realize cultivated land protection through strict implementation of planning.

Thanks again for your advice and I hope to learn more from you.

 

Best wished.

Xufeng Cao

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thanks to the authors for addressing my earlier comments. However, my comments #1 and #3 still need attention.

 

Comment #1, I was not referring to the residuals but rather the variables (both the dependent and the independent variables) that should be reasonably normally distributed. Please check the normality of the variables and apply appropriate transformation if needed.

 

Comment #3, I was not referring to the regression coefficients that are already reported, but rather the standardized regression coefficients (i.e., beta weights). A discussion of the beta weights associated with independent variables should be discussed.

 

I hope the above help clarify my earlier comments, and that the authors will take them into account to revise their paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

    Thanks for your comments concern our manuscript entitled “Analysis of the Impact of Land Use Change on Grain Production in Jiangsu Province” (land-2754649) again. Those comments are valuable and helpful for further revising and improving our paper. We have studied all comments carefully and have made conscientious correction. We used word's revision mode, so the traces of modification are obvious. The main corrections in the paper and the responds are as follows:

Comment 1: I was not referring to the residuals but rather the variables (both the dependent and the independent variables) that should be reasonably normally distributed. Please check the normality of the variables and apply appropriate transformation if needed.

Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion, in this paper we use OLS method to analyze the influencing factors, when using OLS method, it is sufficient but not necessary for the data of dependent and independent variables to be normally distributed. OLS requires the error term to be normal. And when the number of samples exceeds 30, according to the central limit theorem, when the sample size is sufficiently large, the sampling distribution of the sample mean will approach the normal distribution.

Comment 2: I was not referring to the regression coefficients that are already reported, but rather the standardized regression coefficients (i.e., beta weights). A discussion of the beta weights associated with independent variables should be discussed.

Response: Thank you very much for your suggestion, when using the OLS method, the weight of the coefficient is just one. In order to facilitate comparison, this paper adds the units of independent variables in the table 8. And in the analysis about the influencing factors, the main effects of the respective variables on the dependent variable are also discussed, as well as the driving role of the different influencing factors.

Thanks again for your advice and I hope to learn more from you.

 

 

Best wished.

Xufeng Cao

Author Response File: Author Response.docx