Next Article in Journal
Feature Extraction on the Difference of Plant Stem Structure Based on Ultrasound Energy
Previous Article in Journal
Design and Test of Stripping and Impurity Removal Device for Spring-Tooth Residual Plastic Film Collector
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

A Study on the Utilization Rate and Influencing Factors of Small Agricultural Machinery: Evidence from 10 Hilly and Mountainous Provinces in China

Agriculture 2023, 13(1), 51; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13010051
by Hongbo Li 1, Lewei Chen 1 and Zongyi Zhang 2,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Agriculture 2023, 13(1), 51; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13010051
Submission received: 15 November 2022 / Revised: 21 December 2022 / Accepted: 21 December 2022 / Published: 23 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Agricultural Economics, Policies and Rural Management)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I've very appreciated the paper which focussed on a very relevant research question. Among other minor consideration, I would introduce in the discussion section more visibility to the topic of climate change and food security; at least as a further extension of this work.

For this purpose I would suggest to consider in the reference list the following paper: 

Chavas, J.-P.Rivieccio, G.Di Falco, S.De Luca, G., & Capitano, F. (2022). Agricultural diversification, productivity, and food security across time and spaceAgricultural Economics001– 18https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12742

Lacirignola C., Adinolfi F., Capitanio F., Food security in the Mediterranean countries, New Medit, vol 14, n.4, (December 2015), pp. 2-10

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We would like to thank the reviewer for taking the time to review our manuscript. Please see the attachment for more details.

Yours sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article presented is a good work, very well structured and exposed with a lot of order, which facilitates reading. It covers a large extension of the study area, and they have obtained the opinion of a large number of farmers, which gives the study solidity.

There are only a series of issues to highlight:

1. In lines 416-417. The phrase “The reason is that the longer the distance, the lower the opportunity cost, ”. I think it deserves a more detailed explanation. What opportunity cost are you referring to? What do you lose from being further away from the city? I don't see that the justification is because production is inefficient. Subsequently, in section 5.2, he gives an explanation that does not agree, so that opportunity cost must be defined.

2. In lines 418-426. It is indicated that the larger the cultivated plot, the greater the rate of use of agricultural machinery, but this is not necessarily a reason to point out that Economies of Scale are generated. The Economy of Scale is generated when the greater the cultivated area, the adoption of machinery with more power and therefore larger size is manifested, substituting "small tractors" or "micro-tillers" for "large tractors", an issue that is not possible. in the wide study area due to its geographical characteristics and this is indicated by the authors in their conclusions and in their suggestions.

3. In figure 2, the data on the hours of use of the micro-tillers, does not look very good. It would be advisable to expose it in a more visible way.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We are grateful for the suggestions. To be more clearly and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a more detailed interpretation. Please see the attachment for more details.

Yours sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Although the article is generally well written, in my opinion, it has ambiguities in some parts, which I have highlighted in the text and mentioned the ambiguities with comments one by one. Please see the attached file for more details.

The best,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

We are very grateful to your suggestions for the manuscript. Those comments are valuable and very helpful. To be more clearly and in accordance with the reviewer concerns, we have added a more detailed interpretation. Please see the attachment.

Yours sincerely,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop