Off-Farm Employment, Outsourced Machinery Services, and Farmers’ Ratoon Rice Production Behavior: Evidence from Rice Farmers in Central China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

See the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Quality of English is file. Only minor editing is required. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I miss a more critical or detailed assessment of causality between off-farm employment and rice production. Off-farm employemnt is probably a proxy for weaker management because the time used in rice production is less. An assessment of the real and direct causality is missing. One could also imagine that farmers with small or inefficient rice production seek off-farm employment – i.e. reverse causality.

A distinction between correlation and causality and a brief assessment or discussion will strengthen the article and conclusions.

The article leads to an open question: Will less off-farm employment be a better alternative? Do farmers create more total value by having off-farm employment and less rice production? What are the general recommendations in this area?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Article: Off-farm employment, outsourced machinery services on 2 farmers’ ratoon rice production behavior: Evidence from rice farmers in central China

Dear authors, I hope to contribute with reflections and improvements in your study. Below are indications of adjustments after reading your research.

In the abstract the authors state "Our findings will contribute to promote ratoon rice production and enhancing the socialized service system for ratoon rice, so as to provide providing a policy reference for the transformation towards sustainable rice production." (line 26-27).

I believe that the study provides elements for discussion and assistance, but it can promote production. I recommend replacing data with relevance to help in discussions, aligning with the theme indicated in the objective and title.

The purpose of the article must be the same, in the abstract and in the introduction, adjust.

In the introduction, initially the authors could present data on the production and consumption of rice, in China and in the world, to highlight the importance of growing this cereal.

Is China self-sufficient in rice consumption production? export or import rice? indicate the context.

Also indicate which types of production exist, and justify the choice for the cultivation of soca rice.

The authors indicate that, " women usually work in agriculture as well as care for elderly parents and young children". Considering that the study aims to analyse the relationship between jobs outside the farm and the use of machines in rice production, I understand that it is necessary to justify the context of women in this statement, the form indicated seems prejudiced (line 44-45).

The purpose of the article must be the same, in the abstract and in the introduction, adjust. What is the research problem?

Literature review

In section 2.1, would it be up to the authors to indicate data on the types of rice, differences in cultivation and harvesting time, which type requires more development time?

A table could summarize the data, comparing soca rice with other rice crops.

What is the harvesting process and time? Break down the data to make more sense of the hypotheses.

Clarify for the reader the differences in production stages/processes between different types of rice cultivation. What changes in the soca rice process? have advantages? Fists a Table.

Wouldn't replacing machinery with labor be the opposite? (Line 107).

In the methodology,

The authors indicate a sample of 1.649 farms, in the summary there are 1.782. Then they indicate interviews with 30 farms.

It's not clear. What is the population and sample? how was the data collected and analyzed? what basis do they use for the questionnaire presented in the analysis?

My main question regarding the sample, I don't understand, what is the total number of respondents? what differs the data from the population and from the 30 respondents, how were they used for the analysis?

The statistics presented in the Tables may not be relevant if the base is 30 responses. In the case of interviews, it would be necessary to detail and value the specifics more.Before Figure 1, you can present descriptive data (number of responses and percentage), by type OEOMS, OE, NOEOMS, OMS. Explain the differences to the reader.

In table 2, it would be better if the authors indicated the total number of responses, the respective percentage and the SD. Add the indication of respondents for readers. It would be convenient to better explore the descriptive data in this Table in the analysis of the results.

In the analysis of the results,

The authors need to add the discussion of the results with the literature, compare the findings presented in the tables with previous studies.

After Tables 3 to 8, there is no discussion with the literature, how do these results corroborate with similar studies? it is necessary to move forward in the discussions and reflect on whether the findings (in China) are similar to results from other countries in the world.

The authors do not explain the results found in the Tables, what is the significance? what do these data reflect? how do they contribute to the hypotheses of your study? what do they represent? It is a weakness of the research, there is a lack of discussions.

The authors need to explain the hypotheses (give answers that justify the results presented) and contextualize the advantages and disadvantages of mechanized services for the production of soca rice.

The authors used in part 1 and 2 of the study can be used to improve the discussions of the results.

The internal space of the Tables can be simple and the font smaller, to improve and avoid "page break"

In the final contributions,

The authors can reflect on the advantages or not of this type of cultivation, and respond to the hypotheses of the study, as well as the problem and objective (as indicated in the introduction).

Readers should be informed of the research's theoretical-practical contribution to public policies, government officials and rural managers. As well as the contributions of the research to the academic context, what is the contribution of the results to new studies? How does research differ from others? indicate the limitations of the study.

A general revision of the text would be in order, aiming to qualify the use of the English language and some terms.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Most of the suggestions/comments made in the earlier have been incorporated in the revised manuscript. However, in response 2 "Two or three towns were randomly selected from each county".  two or three, specify. it should not be two or three. There are 9 counties. The total number of selected towns will be either 18 or 27. In Table 3, nominal variables (dummies) still have mean and S.D., which are meaningless. Percentage distribution (frequency distribution) of 1 and 0 of such variables can provide better information.

The literary presentation of the manuscript is fairly well. However, minor editing is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

I thank the authors for the letter and indications of the adjustments made.

I would like to clarify, in relation to the sample obtained, in the indication in the methodological procedures section, they indicate that the study has 1,752 observations, but it is still not clear how many farmers there are in all, are there 30 participants? The number of farmers participating in the sample can be different from the number of observations. Distinguish the total of respondents and the total of observations.

in this text indication: “Detailed information are covered about farmers’ 238 ratoon rice production behavior, demographic characteristics, agricultural production. 239 The total number of household observations in our sample is 1816. Out of these, 64 obser- 240 vations were excluded because of missing data and stark outliers for key outcome varia- 241 bles. Hence, 1752 household observations are used for the econométrica analysis.” (p.6).

Other adjustments meet requests. The article brings information about the specificity of soca rice production. Thanks.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf