Can Digital Finance Improve China’s Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you very much to the editors and reviewers for providing us with the opportunity to make revisions. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to everyone. Your modification suggestions have greatly improved the quality of this article. In order to correctly understand the external review comments, we are currently revising and interpreting each comment one by one.

 

1. The article is interesting, and the subject of the paper fits the field of interest of agriculture. However, it has typos and grammatical errors that require a careful English language revision.

Response 1: We have reorganized and revised the entire content to enhance the grammar of the paper.

 

 

2. The quality of research – in terms of methodological rigor, analytical skills and relevance - it is medium / high. The method adopted by the author also presents elements of originality useful for the scientific debate. There is not always clarity in the exposition: some passages are confused, and some considerations are not adequately supported, while some repetitions are present, probable synthesis of a more complex research work of clear scientific value.

Response 2: In order to enhance the refinement and logic of the paper, we have revised and improved the main content to improve the clarity of the paper presentation.

 

 

3. The abstract contains the main sections of the paper and describes findings, ma It is suggested that you review the abstract as the objective of the research does not emerge clearly.

Response 3: We have reorganized and written the abstract of the paper, supplementing and improving the research objectives, methods, conclusions, and inspirations of the abstract. (Line 11 - line 30).

 

 

4. The introduction describes the main aim of the study. In the Introduction the Author states the contribution of the manuscript. In the introduction, the innovative aspect of the paper does not clearly emerge: it is suggested to emphasize the innovative contribution of the paper with respect to the existing literature.

Response 4: We have improved the introduction section of the paper, based on the review of existing literature, proposed the research entry point of this article, and re summarized the marginal contribution of this article. (Line 140 – 160).

 

 

5. The review of the literature is exhaustive but must be more contextualized with respect to the topic of the article. Furthermore, it is suggested to insert some references in support of some concluding remarks.

Response 5: Based on some existing research, we have added research literature on digital finance and agricultural green Total factor productivity to the paper. Based on the summary and shortcomings of existing research, we propose the research entry point of this paper (Line 90 – 101).

 

 

6. The Theoretical/Methodology references appropriately referred to in the work and denote mastery of the subject. The model used needs, to improve the fluidity of the exposure, of further details with reference to the definition the model. Tables are appropriate. In the methodological section, I suggest organizing the questions about hypothesis tests in a table so as not to weigh too much down the discussion and to make the exposition clearer.

Response 6: We strengthened the basis for proposing empirical models in the research design section of the paper. For example:

(1) Based on the analysis and derivation of Production function, a fixed effect model is constructed to test the direct impact of digital finance level on agricultural green Total factor productivity .

(2) Based on theoretical analysis, further use the three-stage Mesomeric effect model to test the impact mechanism of digital finance on improving agricultural green Total factor productivity .

At the same time, based on the review opinions, we have summarized the theoretical analysis and research hypotheses into an internal mechanism diagram as shown in Figure 1, in order to present the theoretical analysis and research hypotheses of the paper more clearly.

 

 

 

7. The results, described with appropriate comments on tables, are affected by a certain hasty in the final part of the paragraph, with evident repetitions and overlaps with the conclusions: improve this section.

Response 7: We conducted a clear analysis of the empirical results to strengthen the explanation of the paper's empirical results, and summarized and refined the research conclusions.

 

 

8. It is suggested to revise the conclusions by taking up the final part of the previous paragraph and eliminating overlapping and duplication of concepts. The main results of the research are however summarized in the periods mentioned. The work provides a theoretical and informative contribution on the topic and useful elements for the scientific debate.

Response 8: We have made modifications and improvements to the conclusion section of the paper, briefly explaining the background of the research question and the data used, and removing duplicate content. We have also reorganized the research conclusion and summarized it into four parts.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Can Digital Finance Improve China's Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity? provides insight into the impact mechanism and effect of digital finance on China's agricultural green total factor productivity by employing panel data from 2011 to 2020. The study examines the direct effect, impact on agricultural technology progress and technical efficiency, on AGTFP by improving the mismatch of agricultural production sources, and by promoting agricultural technology innovation. It is a well-structured and interesting study, however, I suggest the following improvements:

1. The abstract section is interesting and provides much information about the study but the form and style of the abstract is not up to the standard format. Please refer to the authors' guide/ instructions in the authors' section of the journal. The abstract is rich in information but lacks the methodology employed, Although salient finding has been discussed, there is a need to discuss major findings/ results. and importantly, the suggestions/recommendations are missing. Please amend accordingly.

2. Introduction is nicely presented and the authors elaborated on the importance of digital finance on green agriculture total factor productivity but as per their claim Lines 80-82 (However, under the background of the gradual extension of digital financial services to agriculture and rural areas, there is still a lack of evidence on whether digital finance can improve AGTFP.), there are numerous studies on the candidate subject, like:

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6436

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/18/11450

https://books.google.com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=DcuTEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA92&dq=digital+finance+and+green+agriculture+total+factor+productivity&ots=6jcu8aJr5L&sig=nlngole1VrkRAXCsaPR_gQkPm64&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=digital%20finance%20and%20green%20agriculture%20total%20factor%20productivity&f=false

https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/1/195

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2022.860780/full

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-022-24857-x

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00036846.2022.2131721?casa_token=KHoNTdNoVRkAAAAA%3A8C-2jk8xC3Pp6qz0bswUrNaYxCHlsHtK0DX2B-eRQIBBWQNEY0aUGGeXhaAGQ54UC7wg_CTmUtZkiQ

3. The article needs proper referencing, like lines 65, and 104. 

4. Figure 1: Please replace GTFP with AGTFP in the 3rd column.

5. Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10: Captions about the level of significance need correction. Please avoid providing unnecessary captions, like Table 6 does not contain any coefficient, having a 1%  significance level.

6. Value of R² less than 0.3 means a weak effect on the dependent variable. Tables 6-10 show low values. How do authors justify their results?

7. The Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis section presents four Hypotheses, The results section needs to be in line with these hypotheses. 

8. Similarly, the conclusion section also needs to be in line. Hypothesis is the research question proposed by the authors. The results and Conclusion sections need to exclusively address the hypotheses. 

9. Why have the authors employed this methodology? Please state supporting statements and discuss in brief the other econometric techniques that could have been used as substitutes.

 

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you very much to the editors and reviewers for providing us with the opportunity to make revisions. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to everyone. Your modification suggestions have greatly improved the quality of this article. In order to correctly understand the external review comments, we are currently revising and interpreting each comment one by one.

 

 

Can Digital Finance Improve China's Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity? provides insight into the impact mechanism and effect of digital finance on China's agricultural green total factor productivity by employing panel data from 2011 to 2020. The study examines the direct effect, impact on agricultural technology progress and technical efficiency, on AGTFP by improving the mismatch of agricultural production sources, and by promoting agricultural technology innovation. It is a well-structured and interesting study; however, I suggest the following improvements:

1. The abstract section is interesting and provides much information about the study but the form and style of the abstract is not up to the standard format. Please refer to the authors' guide/ instructions in the authors' section of the journal. The abstract is rich in information but lacks the methodology employed, although salient finding has been discussed, there is a need to discuss major findings/ results. and importantly, the suggestions/recommendations are missing. Please amend accordingly.

Response 1: According to the requirements of the journal, we have reorganized the abstract section of the paper and improved the research objectives, methods, conclusions, and inspirations of the abstract (Line 11 - 30).

 

2. Introduction is nicely presented and the authors elaborated on the importance of digital finance on green agriculture total factor productivity but as per their claim Lines 80-82 (However, under the background of the gradual extension of digital financial services to agriculture and rural areas, there is still a lack of evidence on whether digital finance can improve AGTFP.), there are numerous studies on the candidate subject, like:

Response 2: We re strengthened the argument about the entry point of this article in the introduction, supplemented the impact of digital finance on agricultural green Total factor productivity, and combined with the deficiencies of existing research, thus proposed the entry point of this article (Line 90 - 100).

 

 

3. The article needs proper referencing, like lines 65, and 104.

Response 3: We have supplemented some recent research literature to support the viewpoints of lines 65 and lines 104 papers.

For example:

Existing studies show that the impact of digital finance on economic development is multidimensional（Demertzis et al., 2018; Li et al., 2023）[11-12]. (Line 74 - 75).

Existing studies on AGTFP and digital finance have provided a theoretical basis for this paper（Gao et al., 2022; Fu and Zhang, 2022）[34-35] .(Line 121 - 122).

 

• Demertzis M, Merler S, Wolff G B. Capital Markets Union and the Fintech Opportunity. Journal of Financial Regulation, 2018, 4, 1, 157-165. DOI: 10.1093/jfr/fjx012.
• Li C, Wang Y, Zhou Z, et al. Digital finance and enterprise financing constraints: Structural characteristics and mechanism identification. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 165, 114074. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres. 2023.114074.
• Gao Q, Cheng C, Sun G, et al. The impact of digital inclusive finance on agricultural green total factor productivity: Evidence from China. Climate Change and Agricultural System Response, 2022,10, 399. DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2022.905644.
• Fu W, Zhang R. Can Digitalization Levels Affect Agricultural Total Factor Productivity? Evidence From China. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022; 6, 860780. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2022.860780.

 

 

4. Figure 1: Please replace GTFP with AGTFP in the 3rd column.

Response 4: We have replaced GTFP in Figure 1 with AGTFP. (Line 164).

 

 

5. Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10: Captions about the level of significance need correction. Please avoid providing unnecessary captions, like Table 6 does not contain any coefficient, having a 1% significance level.

Response 5: We have corrected the annotations regarding significance levels in Tables 6,7,8,9,10. Unify the results with the same level of significance as in the table.

 

 

6. Value of R2 less than 0.3 means a weak effect on the dependent variable. Tables 6-10 show low values. How do authors justify their results?

Response 6: After determining the test variables, in order to improve the interpretability of the empirical results and prevent the "pseudo regression" phenomenon in the model, the paper first conducted a Root of unity test on the stability between variables, and the test results are shown in Table 4. After determining the test variables, in order to improve the interpretability of the empirical results and prevent the "pseudo regression" phenomenon in the model, we first conducted a Root of unity test on the stability between variables, and the test results are shown in Table 4. The Root of unity test shows that the stability of variables is tested according to the ADF method. According to the measurement results, the original values and first order differences of GTFP, GEC, GTC, Pose, RD, Die, Scop, Deep, Dig are all stable, indicating that the model does not have "pseudo regression" phenomenon, the variables are stable, and there is an obvious causal relationship between the explanatory variables and the explained variables. (Line 461 - 468).

The robustness of the results is tested to prove the accuracy of the research results. (Line 619 - 628).

 

 

7. The Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis section presents four Hypotheses; the results section needs to be in line with these hypotheses.

Response 7: Based on theoretical analysis, four research hypotheses were proposed for this article, and then empirical testing was conducted for each hypothesis in the fourth outcome test.

For example:

To verify the direct impact of the development level of digital finance on agricul-tural green total factor productivity, green technology efficiency, and green technology progress rate, empirical tests were conducted based on equations (5) - (7) to verify the research hypotheses 1 and 2 in this article. The test results are shown in Table 7. (Line 508 - 513)

According to theoretical analysis and research hypotheses 3 and 4, digital finance has a positive impact on agricultural green Total factor productivity by improving the mis-match of agricultural resources and promoting agricultural technological innovation. This impact mechanism is tested based on the Mesomeric effect model formula (8) - (11). The test results are shown in Table 9 and Table 10. (Line 552 - 557).

 

 

8. Similarly, the conclusion section also needs to be in line. Hypothesis is the research question proposed by the authors. The results and Conclusion sections need to exclusively address the hypotheses.

Response 8: Based on research hypotheses and empirical results, we have re summarized the research conclusions of the paper and expanded the discussion and analysis of the four research conclusions, thereby enhancing the research contribution of this study.

9. Why have the authors employed this methodology? Please state supporting statements and discuss in brief the other econometric techniques that could have been used as substitutes.

Response 9: Based on the Panel data of 29 provinces in China from 2011 to 2020, this paper uses the fixed effect model and the mesomeric effect model to empirically test the impact and mechanism of China's digital financial development on agricultural green Total factor productivity, and uses the replacement interpretation method to test the robustness of the main test results, so as to improve the accuracy of the research results in this paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

1) The part of the research motivation should strengthen why the influence of digital finance on AGTFP is so worthy of research? Especially in the sampling area selected by the author.

2) To strengthen the explanation of the theoretical basis of this study, what kind of research needs is the selected foundation theory based on? How strong is the connection between China's current agricultural development and this theory?

3) The sampling part is lacking, and needs to be strengthened. Are the sources of the official data used a conflict of interest consideration?

4) Lack of research limitations. I suggest that management implications and practical applications brought about by this study should be added, so as to strengthen the research contribution of this study.

5) It is recommended that the author add references from the past two years. For literature that is too old, we must consider whether it is necessary, whether it is a classic literature or a basic theory that needs to be cited, otherwise the literature that is too old cannot reflect the current research status.

Moderate editing of English language required.

Author Response

Thank you very much to the editors and reviewers for providing us with the opportunity to make revisions. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to everyone. Your modification suggestions have greatly improved the quality of this article. In order to correctly understand the external review comments, we are currently revising and interpreting each comment one by one.

 

 

1. The part of the research motivation should strengthen why the influence of digital finance on AGTFP is so worthy of research? Especially in the sampling area selected by the author.

Response 1: In the introduction section, we first strengthened the analysis of the importance of finance for the green development of agriculture. Finance, as a scarce resource, is an important factor affecting the development of agricultural green economy. However, there is a significant imbalance in the allocation of financial resources among regions in China, especially in the agricultural sector, which faces serious financial exclusion and suppression. But with the development of digital finance, financial resources and services have gradually extended to agriculture and rural areas, improving the demand upgrading and supply transformation of agriculture and rural areas, stimulating the potential for green development in agriculture, and bringing opportunities for the modernization of China's agriculture. This article analyzes the impact of digital finance on the green development of agriculture.

 

2. To strengthen the explanation of the theoretical basis of this study, what kind of research needs is the selected foundation theory based on? How strong is the connection between China's current agricultural development and this theory?

Response 2: We have supplemented the theoretical basis of the paper, mainly based on resource allocation theory and technological innovation theory. Promoting technological innovation is the internal power to improve agricultural green Total factor productivity, and improving resource allocation is the internal power to improve agricultural green Total factor productivity. (Line 125 - 139).

 

 

3. The sampling part is lacking, and needs to be strengthened. Are the sources of the official data used a conflict of interest consideration?

Response 3: We have strengthened the explanation on sample selection, mainly selecting 29 provincial sample data in China based on the availability of data, and there is no conflict of interest. (Line 298 - 312).

 

 

4. Lack of research limitations. I suggest that management implications and practical applications brought about by this study should be added, so as to strengthen the research contribution of this study.

Response 4: Based on the research ideas and conclusions of the paper, we have supplemented the research shortcomings of the paper (Line 735- 746).

We have added and supplemented the discussion section of the paper, thereby enhancing the research contribution of this study. (Line 630 - 673).

 

 

5. It is recommended that the author add references from the past two years. For literature that is too old, we must consider whether it is necessary, whether it is a classic literature or a basic theory that needs to be cited, otherwise the literature that is too old cannot reflect the current research status.

Response 5: We have chosen to delete 9 older references and add 24 new references from recent years to support our research.

 

 

 

Newly added references:

• Demertzis M, Merler S, Wolff G B. Capital Markets Union and the Fintech Opportunity. Journal of Financial Regulation, 2018, 4(1): 157-165. DOI:1093/jfr/fjx012.
• Deng H, Jing X, Shen Z. Internet technology and green productivity in agriculture. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022, 29(54): 81441-81451. DOI:1007/s11356-022-21370-z.
• Fu W, Zhang R. Can Digitalization Levels Affect Agricultural Total Factor Productivity? Evidence From China. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2022; 6:860780. DOI:3389/fsufs.2022.860780.
• Fu Z, Zhou Y, Li W, et al. Impact of digital finance on energy efficiency: Empirical findings from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2023, 30(2): 2813-2835.DOI: 1007/s11356-022-22320-5.
• Gao Q, Cheng C, Sun G, et al. The impact of digital inclusive finance on agricultural green total factor productivity: Evidence from China. Climate Change and Agricultural System Response, 2022,10:399.DOI:3389/fevo.2022.905644.
• Ge H, Li B, Tang D, et al. Research on digital inclusive finance promoting the integration of rural three-industry. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, 19(6): 3363. DOI:3390/ijerph19063363.
• Guo J, Zhang K, Liu K. Exploring the mechanism of the impact of green finance and digital economy on China’s green total factor productivity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022, 19(23): 16303.DOI: 3390/ijerph192316303.
• Hong, M.; Tian, M.; Wang, J. Digital Inclusive Finance, Agricultural Industrial Structure Optimization and Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 11450. DOI: 10.3390/su141811450.
• Li C, Wang Y, Zhou Z, et al. Digital finance and enterprise financing constraints: Structural characteristics and mechanism identification. Journal of Business Research, 2023, 165: 114074.DOI:1016/j.jbusres. 2023.114074.
• Li G, Jia X, Khan A, et al. Does green finance promote agricultural green total factor productivity? Considering green credit, green investment, green securities, and carbon finance in. Environ Sci Pollut Res,2023, 30, 36663–36679. DOI:1007/s11356-022-24857-x.
• Meng W, Li S, Liu J, et al. Influence mechanism of digital inclusive finance in promoting rural revitalization. Econ. Probl, 2023, 523: 102-111.
• Sasidharan S, Lukose P, Komera S. Financing constraints and investments in R&D: Evidence from Indian manufacturing firms. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 2015, 55: 28-39. DOI:1016/j.qref.2014.07.002.
• Shen, Y.; Guo, X.; Zhang, X. Digital Financial Inclusion, Land Transfer, and Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity. Sustainability, 2023, 15, 6436. DOI: 10.3390/su15086436.
• Sun Y. Environmental regulation, agricultural green technology innovation, and agricultural green total factor productivity. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2022, 10: 955954. DOI:3389/fenvs.2022.955954.
• Wang L, Tang J, Tang M, et al. Scale of Operation, Financial Support, and Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity: Evidence from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(15):9043. DOI:3390/ijerph19159043.
• Xie W, Wang T, Zhao X. Does digital inclusive finance promote coastal rural entrepreneurship. Journal of Coastal Research, 2020, 103(SI): 240-245. DOI:2112/SI103-052.1.
• Zhang, Y. Chinese Rural Financial Exclusion. Management Science Engineering, 2013. 7, 35–39. DOI:3968/3950.
• Zhou X, Chen T, Zhang B. Research on the Impact of Digital Agriculture Development on Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity. Land. 2023; 12(1):195. DOI:3390/land12010195.
• Zhou Z, Zhang Y, Yan Z. Will Digital Financial Inclusion Increase Chinese Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Agricultural Technology. Agriculture, 2022, 12(10): 1514.DOI: 3390/agriculture12101514.
• Wang, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Bo, Y. China's agricultural green total factor productivity and its spatio-temporal evolution. Statistics and Decision, 2022, 38, 20, 98-102. DOI: 10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2022.20.019.
• Jin, S.; Wang, P. Population aging, rural land transfer and agricultural green Total factor productivity. Macroeconomics, 2023, 290, 1, 101-117. DOI: 10.16304/j.cnki.11-3952/f.2023.01.008.
• Shen, Y.; Guo, X.; Zhang, X. Digital Financial Inclusion, Land Transfer, and Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity. Sustainability, 2023, 15, 6436. DOI: 10.3390/su15086436.
• Hong, M.; Tian, M.; Wang, J. Digital Inclusive Finance, Agricultural Industrial Structure Optimization and Agricultural Green Total Factor Productivity. Sustainability, 2022, 14, 11450. DOI: 10.3390/su141811450.
• Tang, J.; Gong, J.; Song, Q.H. Digital financial inclusion and agricultural total factor productivity: the role of factor flow and technology diffusion. Chinese Rural Economy, 2022, 451, 7, 81-102. DOI: 10.20077/j.cnki.11-1262/f.2022.07.003.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The processed paper is well-written and structured. The general idea of the paper is defined, and also the objectives are rational. The proposed methodology is also rational and well-designed. There are several controversial statements, but I do not want to become the co-author - as I would suggest a different approach to measure the proposed problem. On the other hand, the paper as the paper's results are supported by relevant arguments. The only problem is the limited results discussion. I would suggest extending the discussion of individual results. The paper is suitable for publishing.

Author Response

Thank you very much to the editors and reviewers for providing us with the opportunity to make revisions. We would like to take this opportunity to express our gratitude to everyone. Your modification suggestions have greatly improved the quality of this article. In order to correctly understand the external review comments, we are currently revising and interpreting each comment one by one.

 

 

The processed paper is well-written and structured. The general idea of the paper is defined, and also the objectives are rational. The proposed methodology is also rational and well-designed. There are several controversial statements, but I do not want to become the co-author - as I would suggest a different approach to measure the proposed problem. On the other hand, the paper as the paper's results is supported by relevant arguments. The only problem is the limited results discussion. I would suggest extending the discussion of individual results. The paper is suitable for publishing.

Response: We have supplemented the discussion section of the paper and extended the analysis of the four research conclusions, thereby enhancing the research contribution of this study. (Line 630 - 673).

 

 

Discussions

Firstly，from 2011 to 2020, China's AGTFP continued to improve, mainly driven by technological progress. In terms of regional distribution, the AGTFP in non-major grain producing areas is significantly higher than that in major grain producing areas. Although China's AGTFP shows a "two wheel" growth mode driven by technological progress and technical efficiency, technological regression is the main reason for the decline in agricultural green total factor productivity in some provinces. This confirms the views of Wang et al. (2022) [70], Jin et al. (2023) [71] to some extent.

Secondly, digital finance has effectively improved the AGTFP of China's provinces. This is consistent with the research conclusions of Shen et al. (2023) [72] and Hong et al. (2022) [73]. On the premise of continuous progress of digital Financial inclusion, more and more financial resources have been able to enter agricultural development, and the financing difficulties of farmers and rural small and micro enterprises have been improved to a certain extent. Compared with traditional financial services, digital Financial inclusion can help to reduce the cost of agricultural production, improve the scale economic benefits of agriculture and improve the level of rural governance, and ultimately achieve the effect of improving AGTFP.

Thirdly, the three sub-dimensions of digital finance (coverage, depth of use, and degree of digitization) have promoted AGTFP. With the improvement of the coverage of digital finance, the threshold of financial services has been lowered, the original restrictions of the financial market have been broken, and digital financial services have brought more long tail effects to agricultural development, effectively promoting the green development of agriculture. As the depth of use of digital finance increases, it indicates that the availability of services such as investment, credit, and evaluation in digital finance has improved, which helps to improve the risk resilience in agricultural production and agricultural product sales and can effectively improve the economic benefits of agricultural production. The deepening of the degree of digitization helps to reduce agricultural transaction costs and improve the efficiency of agricultural production. The coverage has a greater promoting effect on AGTFP, the promotion effect of digitization degree was the second, and the promotion effect of depth of use was the least. However, Tang et al. (2022) [74] found in the empirical analysis of the impact of digital Financial inclusion development on ATFP that the strongest role in promoting ATFP is the depth of use of digital Financial inclusion products and services, followed by the degree of digitalization, and finally the breadth of coverage. The inconsistency of conclusions may be related to the selection of sample cross-section and different indicator processing methods.

Forthly, it discusses the impact mechanism of digital Financial inclusion on AGTFP from four aspects：the direct impact of digital finance on AGTFP, the impact of digital finance on agricultural technology progress and technical efficiency, the impact of digital finance on AGTFP by improving the mismatch of agricultural production resources and the impact of digital finance on AGTFP by promoting agricultural technology innovation. Unlike existing research [19-21], it opened the "black box" of digital finance to improve AGTFP, analyzed the impact of digital Financial inclusion on AGTFP and its internal mechanism more systematically and comprehensively, and provided empirical evidence for digital finance to promote agricultural green development.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you authors for considering the suggestion and incorporating them in the manuscript.

1. The abstract section has been substantially improved as suggested.

2. Point 2 has been amended as required by adding proper references. 

3. References have been added as suggested.

4. GTFP has been replaced with AGTFP as suggested.

5. Table 8 still needs revision in the light of previous comment (Comment No. 5)

6. Agreed. Thank you authors for providing a detailed explanation.

7-8. Found OK.

9. This point has been properly replied to but not incorporated properly in the manuscript and also the information regarding other econometric techniques which could have been used is missing. Please add missing information in the main body.

The authors have done a great job but point 5 and 9 still need a bit of improvement. 

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Thank you again for the review experts' suggestions for modification, your modification suggestions have greatly improved the quality of this article.

 

 

5. Table 8 still needs revision in the light of previous comment (Comment No. 5)

Response 5: We have corrected the annotations regarding significance levels in Tables 8.

 

 

9. Why have the authors employed this methodology? Please state supporting statements and discuss in brief the other econometric techniques that could have been used as substitutes.

This point has been properly replied to but not incorporated properly in the manuscript and also the information regarding other econometric techniques which could have been used is missing. Please add missing information in the main body.

Response 9: Based on the Panel data of 29 provinces in China from 2011 to 2020, this paper uses the fixed effect model and the mesomeric effect model to empirically test the impact and mechanism of China's digital financial development on agricultural green Total factor productivity. The main role of setting fixed effects is to solve the heterogeneity problem in Panel data. Due to the obvious heterogeneity differences among regions in China, it may have an impact on the model estimation results, making the estimation results inaccurate. By setting regional fixed effects to control heterogeneity differences between regions, and setting time fixed effects to control influencing factors that do not change with regions, the accuracy of model estimation results is improved. (Line 318 – 323).

To reduce the impact of endogeneity and improve the robustness of research conclusions, this paper uses a differential GMM model for robustness testing. (Line 608 - 617).

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript has been corrected.

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Thank you to the experts for their feedback. The language of the article has been improved