A Study on the Trade Efficiency and Potential of China’s Agricultural Products Export to Association of South East Asian Nations Countries: Empirical Analysis Based on Segmented Products

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article analyzes the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN countries using a stochastic gravity model based on data from 2007 to 2020. The study focuses on identifying the main factors influencing trade and assessing differences in trade efficiency among various categories of agricultural products. The article is organized into sections: introduction, theoretical analysis and research hypotheses, study design, empirical analysis, and conclusion and discussion. After reviewing the article as a whole, it is recommended to make a few changes and analyze the text for linguistic consistency and grammatical accuracy.

 

In the introduction, the authors note the growth in trade between China and ASEAN and an average rate of change of 8.8%, but it is unclear where this estimate comes from or what data were used to calculate it. The same issue applies to estimates for agricultural trade. Additionally, note the repetitions that occur in the text. For example: "Studies on trade efficiency of agricultural products show that there are obvious country-specific efficiency differences in China-ASEAN bilateral trade, and trade efficiency is negatively correlated with trade volume [6]. Trade efficiency is negatively correlated with trade volume." In lines 74-78, three sentences start with the word "Therefore"—this should be changed to avoid repetition. The introduction should also clearly state the purpose of the study and provide a clearer outline of the article so that the reader can easily understand the structure of the paper.

 

In the next section of the article (Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses), the hypotheses need to be corrected because they are not understandable and clear to the reader. For hypotheses 1-4, it is unclear what is meant by a positive or negative impact on Chinese exports. Does this refer to an increase or decrease in exports? Hypotheses 2 and 3 should not be phrased as questions but as statements. For example, H2 could be: "The common border between the two countries influences the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN."

 

In the next section of the article, it is important to explain the stochastic gravity model in more detail for readers who may not be familiar with the technique. Consider adding a diagram or flow chart to better illustrate the data analysis steps. Additionally, the article lacks a discussion of its limitations and possible ways to improve it. This includes explaining how the absence of data from Brunei and Laos affects the study's results and how this could be addressed. Moreover, potential confounders should be considered, and their impact on the results controlled. It is also worth questioning why disaggregated data at the HS-6 level, which is available on UNComtrade, was not used to obtain more accurate results.

When analyzing the results, they should be described in more detail to better understand why certain factors have specific impacts on trade. Inconsistencies in the results, such as those related to common language or distance between countries, should also be explained. Additionally, in section "4.2.3 Export Efficiency and Potential Analysis" and subsequent sections, explanations of the results are lacking. The text lists changes in results, indicating whether they have increased or decreased, which can be seen in the tables. This should be corrected, and references to the results of other researchers who used the same model or other models should be added to compare the findings. It is recommended to include a discussion of the results, as the last part of the article currently lacks one. The summary and conclusions should be treated as a separate section.

 

In the summary, it should be clearly stated which hypotheses were verified and confirmed or disconfirmed. Additionally, the section on policy implications can be expanded to propose specific policy actions that can be implemented to improve trade efficiency.

Author Response

Author's Reply to the Review Report (Reviewer 1)

Dear editor:

Thank you for your kind letters of “Manuscript ID: agriculture-3062848 ” on August 7, 2024,  and for the reviewers' comments concerning our manuscript enti A Study on the Trade Efficiency and Potential of China's Agricultural Products Export to ASEAN: Empirical analysis based on segmented products”. We revised the manuscript in accordance with the editor's and reviewers' comments, and carefully proof-read the manuscript to minimize typographical, grammatical, and bibliographical errors.

 

Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers' comments.

 

 

• After reviewing the article as a whole, it is recommended to make a few changes and analyze the text for linguistic consistency and grammatical accuracy.

 

Authors' Response: Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable suggestions. I have made overall revisions and polishing to the sentence structure and grammar of the full text based on your suggestions to ensure consistency of language and accuracy of grammar. I hope the revised article can meet your requirements and look forward to your further feedback.

 

• In the introduction, the authors note the growth in trade between China and ASEAN and an average rate of change of 8.8%, but it is unclear where this estimate comes from or what data were used to calculate it. The same issue applies to estimates for agricultural trade.

 

Authors' Response:

Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable feedback. Based on your suggestions, I have added relevant references regarding the 8.8% trade growth rate between China and ASEAN, as well as the estimation of agricultural trade, so that readers can trace the sources and calculation basis of these data.

 

The revised part is as following:

1. Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China, Department of International Trade Negotiations. The Deepening Effect of the RCEP Agreement on Economic and Trade Cooperation between China, Japan, and Korea [EB/OL]. http://asean.mofcom.gov.cn/article/zthdt/rcep/202401/20240103468608.shtml, 2024-01-12.
2. Yang, F.; Qian, J. Opening up of China's agriculture to the outside world in the 14th five-year plan: situation, problems and countermeasures. J. Huazhong Agr. U. (Soc. Sci. Edit.) 2021, 49-56+175-176.

 

• Additionally, note the repetitions that occur in the text. For example: "Studies on trade efficiency of agricultural products show that there are obvious country-specific efficiency differences in China-ASEAN bilateral trade, and trade efficiency is negatively correlated with trade volume [6]. Trade efficiency is negatively correlated with trade volume." In lines 74-78, three sentences start with the word "Therefore"—this should be changed to avoid repetition.

 

Authors' Response:Thank you very much for your careful review and valuable suggestions on my article. I have noticed the repetition issue in the text and have made deletions and revisions to the parts you mentioned. At the same time, I have also carefully examined the entire article to ensure that such repetition issues are eliminated.

 

• The introduction should also clearly state the purpose of the study and provide a clearer outline of the article so that the reader can easily understand the structure of the paper.

 

Authors' Response:Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable suggestions. Based on your feedback, I have rewritten the introduction and added paragraphs to clearly describe the outline and structure of the article, so that readers can better understand the content and framework of this paper.

The revised part is as following:

In view of this, this paper aims to conduct an in-depth analysis of the current status of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN countries, particularly focusing on the export situation of different segmented products (such as animal products, plant products, animal and vegetable oils and fats, food, beverages, and tobacco). It analyzes the spatiotemporal evolution factors that affect trade efficiency and product differentiation and explores the inducing effects of a low-carbon economy on China-ASEAN agricultural export trade. Using the Stochastic Frontier Gravity Model and based on panel data from 2007 to 2020, this paper empirically analyzes the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN countries, aiming to provide references for formulating more precise agricultural export trade policies.

The structure of this paper is organized as follows: The second part presents the theoretical analysis and research hypotheses, proposing the research hypotheses of this paper based on the Preference Similarity Theory, the Traction Growth Theory, and the Fallacy of Composition Theory. The third part discusses the research design, introducing the data sources, variable selection, and model construction. The fourth part is the empirical analysis, including model applicability testing, analysis of the results of the Stochastic Frontier Gravity Model, analysis of the results of the trade inefficiency model, and analysis of export efficiency and potential. The fifth part presents the conclusions and discussions, summarizing the research findings, proposing policy recommendations, and indicating future research directions.

 

 

• In the next section of the article (Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses), the hypotheses need to be corrected because they are not understandable and clear to the reader. For hypotheses 1-4, it is unclear what is meant by a positive or negative impact on Chinese exports. Does this refer to an increase or decrease in exports? Hypotheses 2 and 3 should not be phrased as questions but as statements. For example, H2 could be: "The common border between the two countries influences the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN."

 

Authors' Response:Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable suggestions on the 'Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypotheses' section. I have revised Hypotheses 1-5 based on your suggestions.

The revised part is as following:

H1: An increase in China's total agricultural output will promote the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN.

H2: A common border between the two countries will facilitate the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN.

H3: A common language between the two countries has a positive impact on the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN.

H4: An increase in the agricultural output value of ASEAN countries will promote the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN.

H5: The degree of economic policy openness (shipping, finance, trade, investment) of ASEAN countries has a mixed impact on China-ASEAN agricultural exports.

 

 

• In the next section of the article, it is important to explain the stochastic gravity model in more detail for readers who may not be familiar with the technique. Consider adding a diagram or flow chart to better illustrate the data analysis steps.

Authors' Response:

Thank you for your valuable suggestions. Based on your feedback, I have created a flow chart to better explain the data analysis steps.

 

The revised part is as following:

 

 

• Additionally, the article lacks a discussion of its limitations and possible ways to improve it. This includes explaining how the absence of data from Brunei and Laos affects the study's results and how this could be addressed.

Authors' Response:

Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable suggestions. Based on your feedback, I have added a discussion on the limitations of this paper and possible improvements in the discussion section. Specifically, I have explained how the lack of data from Brunei and Laos affects the research results, and what methods can be used in the future to compensate for this deficiency.

 

The revised part is as following:

Despite the achievements, this study also has limitations. Due to data unavailability, Brunei and Laos were excluded from the sample, potentially affecting the representativeness of the findings. Future research should strive to obtain more comprehensive data to improve sample coverage. Additionally, this study focuses primarily on static analyses of export efficiency and potential; dynamic mechanisms, such as changes in trade network structures and market demand fluctuations, could be further explored to gain a more holistic understanding of agricultural export dynamics.

 

• Moreover, potential confounders should be considered, and their impact on the results controlled. It is also worth questioning why disaggregated data at the HS-6 level, which is available on UNComtrade, was not used to obtain more accurate results.

Authors' Response:Thanks for your feedback, the HS-6 code precisely classifies the various categories of products, but based on research needs, SITC classifies trade products not only according to the material and physical properties of trade products, but also according to which stage of processing and their economic functions, which is more conducive to economic analysis.

 

• When analyzing the results, they should be described in more detail to better understand why certain factors have specific impacts on trade. Inconsistencies in the results, such as those related to common language or distance between countries, should also be explained.

Authors' Response:Thanks for your valuable advice, based on your feedback, I have further explained the results related to common language or distance between countries.

The revised part is as following:

Model 2 shows that for the first type of animal products, China's total agricultural output value (ACGDP), ASEAN member countries' total agricultural output value (AGDP) and ASEAN member countries' per capita CARBON emissions (carbon) have a significant positive impact on China's animal product exports, which is consistent with the expected symbols. Distance DIST between the two countries has a significant positive impact on China's export of this kind of product, which is inconsistent with the expected symbol, which may be because the export of this kind of product is also affected by other factors, such as trade facilitation to further shorten the trade time and cost, foreign investment in China's agriculture to increase, etc. Therefore, it may be biased to consider the impact of distance on the export of animal products separately. Whether there is a common border BOR or not and whether there is a common language LANG have a significant negative impact on the export of such products in China, which is inconsistent with the expected symbols. This may be because although common border and language serve as carriers to promote cross-cultural communication between the two sides of trade, their use situations may be different in different cultural environments. We should give full consideration to the different cultural backgrounds, ways of thinking, values and customs of different countries.

Model 3 shows that for the second type of plant products, China's total agricultural output value (ACGDP), ASEAN member countries' total agricultural output value (AGDP), whether there is a common border (BOR), and per capita CARBON emission (carbon) of ASEAN member countries have a significant positive impact on the export of Chinese plant products, which is consistent with the expected symbols. Whether there is a common language LANG has a significant negative impact on the export of Chinese plant products, which is inconsistent with the expected symbol. This may be because the language as a communication tool has a profound cultural background, and sometimes the same word will express different meanings, which will cause disputes and misunderstandings. The distance between the two countries has no significant effect on the export of such products.

Model 4 shows that for the third type of animal and vegetable oils, per capita CARBON emissions of ASEAN member countries have a significant positive impact on China's animal and vegetable oil exports, which is consistent with the expected symbol. Whether there is a common language LANG has a significant negative impact on the export of such products in China, which is inconsistent with the expected symbol, which may also be due to the different use of language in different cultural environments, and the cultural background of each country should be fully considered. The total agricultural output value of China (ACGDP), the total agricultural output value of ASEAN member states (AGDP), the distance DIST between the two countries and whether there is a common border (BOR) have no significant influence on the export of such products.

 

• Additionally, in section "4.2.3 Export Efficiency and Potential Analysis" and subsequent sections, explanations of the results are lacking. The text lists changes in results, indicating whether they have increased or decreased, which can be seen in the tables. This should be corrected, and references to the results of other researchers who used the same model or other models should be added to compare the findings.

Authors' Response:Thanks for your valuable suggestions. Based on your feedback, I have cited the results of other researchers for comparison and deleted some data explanations and added explanations.

The revised part is as following:

Table 9 displays the trade efficiency of China's segmented agricultural exports to ASEAN countries, which is further measured based on the results of the one-step technique of the stochastic frontier gravity model. A better export efficiency is indicated by a larger value for the export efficiency, which takes values between 0 and 1.

From the perspective of the total export of agricultural products, the efficiency of China's agricultural export trade with ASEAN members is extremely unbalanced. China's export efficiency to Malaysia and Singapore ranks first and has remained above 0.9, which is due to the strong trade complementarity between China and Singapore [25]. The efficiency of China's exports to the Philippines first declined and then rebounded, while the efficiency of exports to Thailand and Myanmar steadily increased. On the contrary, China's agricultural export efficiency to Indonesia continues to decline, and its trade efficiency to Myanmar and Cambodia is always low, which indicates that China has not effectively developed its agricultural export market [26]. China should take advantage of its resource endowment and use advanced agricultural technology to enhance the added value of agricultural products, so as to further improve its trade efficiency with these countries.

 

25. Chen, Y.S.; Wang, Y.M. Research on the trade structure, efficiency, and influencing factors of agricultural products between China and RCEP member countries: An empirical analysis based on segmented products. World Agric. 2021, (12), 72-83+106+128.
26. Li, M.; Yu, Y.; Xu, Y.Y. et al. Trade efficiency and potential of agricultural products exported from China to RCEP member countries: An analysis based on the stochastic frontier gravity model. World Agric. 2021, (08), 33-43+68+119

• It is recommended to include a discussion of the results, as the last part of the article currently lacks one. The summary and conclusions should be treated as a separate section.

Authors' Response:Thank you for your valuable feedback. I have taken your suggestion into account and have revised the structure of the article accordingly. I have now included a discussion of the results as part of the '5. Conclusions and Discussions' section, addressing the gap that was previously noted. The summary and conclusions have been treated as a separate part within this section to ensure a clear and structured presentation.

The revised part is as following:

Based on panel data of China's agricultural export trade to eight ASEAN countries from 2007 to 2020, this study empirically examines the spatiotemporal evolution and product differences of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN by measuring the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to these countries. The study employs a stochastic frontier gravity model to analyze the core factors affecting China's agricultural exports.The results reveal that China's agricultural exports to ASEAN mainly include plant products, food and beverages, and tobacco, with animal products mainly exported to Thailand, plant products mainly to Vietnam, and animal and vegetable oils, fats, food and beverages, and tobacco mainly to Malaysia.

Further analysis shows that China's agricultural gross domestic product (ACGDP) has a significant positive impact on agricultural exports to ASEAN, confirming Hypothesis 1. The presence of a common border (BOR) has varying effects on different product categories, generally showing a positive impact on some categories while having insignificant or even negative effects on others, partially confirming Hypothesis 2. Conversely, the presence of a common language (LANG) has a significant negative impact on agricultural exports, contrary to conventional expectations. The possible reason is that the use of a common language does not automatically translate into effective marketing and communication strategies. Differences in marketing channels, promotional methods, and packaging may hinder the acceptance of agricultural products in the target market, reflecting the complex role of cultural factors in agricultural trade and thus confirming Hypothesis 3. The agricultural gross domestic product (AGDP) of ASEAN countries also has a positive impact on China's agricultural exports, indicating that the increase in ASEAN's agricultural production drives the demand for Chinese agricultural products, verifying Hypothesis 4. The indicators of economic policy openness (such as the Shipping Connectivity Index (SHP), Financial Freedom (FIN), Trade Freedom (TRA), Investment Freedom (INV), and Government Expenditure (GOV)) have varying impacts, both positive and negative. It is worth noting that while geographical distance typically increases transportation costs and transit time, the results are the opposite. The possible reason is that the positive impact of economic scale and market demand on agricultural exports may outweigh the negative impact of distance. Large economies with high demand levels can offset the costs associated with distance and cultural differences, supporting Hypothesis 5. Furthermore, China's agricultural exports to ASEAN exhibit significant differences across different product categories (such as animal products, plant products, animal and vegetable oils, food and beverages, and tobacco), showing a distinct segmented commodity structure, verifying Hypothesis 6. The per capita carbon emissions (CARBON) of ASEAN countries have a significant positive impact on China's exports of different categories of agricultural products, indicating that ASEAN's transition to a low-carbon economy has changed demand preferences and affected the structure of China's agricultural exports, thus confirming Hypothesis 7.

This study makes marginal contributions in several aspects. Firstly, it introduces per capita carbon emissions of ASEAN countries as an explanatory variable into the stochastic frontier gravity model, enriching the literature by analyzing the impact of the low-carbon economic transition on China's agricultural exports. Secondly, through segmented product analysis, it reveals differences in export efficiency and potential across various agricultural product categories, providing more targeted policy recommendations. Thirdly, by incorporating low-carbon economic factors, it offers a new perspective on understanding changes in the agricultural trade pattern against the backdrop of global climate change. Lastly, based on panel data spanning a long time horizon, it provides empirical evidence for the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, facilitating deeper cooperation between China and ASEAN in the agricultural sector.

Despite the achievements, this study also has limitations. Due to data unavailability, Brunei and Laos were excluded from the sample, potentially affecting the representativeness of the findings. Future research should strive to obtain more comprehensive data to improve sample coverage. Additionally, this study focuses primarily on static analyses of export efficiency and potential; dynamic mechanisms, such as changes in trade network structures and market demand fluctuations, could be further explored to gain a more holistic understanding of agricultural export dynamics.

 

• In the summary, it should be clearly stated which hypotheses were verified and confirmed or disconfirmed. Additionally, the section on policy implications can be expanded to propose specific policy actions that can be implemented to improve trade efficiency.

Authors' Response:

Thank you for your valuable suggestions. I have carefully considered your feedback and made the necessary revisions to the article. In the summary, I have now clearly stated which hypotheses were verified and confirmed or disconfirmed, as you recommended.

Furthermore, I have expanded the section on policy implications and created a separate chapter titled '6. Policy Recommendations'. In this chapter, I have proposed specific policy actions that can be implemented to improve trade efficiency, along with a discussion on their feasibility.

 

The revised part is as following:

Further analysis shows that China's agricultural gross domestic product (ACGDP) has a significant positive impact on agricultural exports to ASEAN, confirming Hypothesis 1. The presence of a common border (BOR) has varying effects on different product categories, generally showing a positive impact on some categories while having insignificant or even negative effects on others, partially confirming Hypothesis 2. Conversely, the presence of a common language (LANG) has a significant negative impact on agricultural exports, contrary to conventional expectations. The possible reason is that the use of a common language does not automatically translate into effective marketing and communication strategies. Differences in marketing channels, promotional methods, and packaging may hinder the acceptance of agricultural products in the target market, reflecting the complex role of cultural factors in agricultural trade and thus confirming Hypothesis 3. The agricultural gross domestic product (AGDP) of ASEAN countries also has a positive impact on China's agricultural exports, indicating that the increase in ASEAN's agricultural production drives the demand for Chinese agricultural products, verifying Hypothesis 4. The indicators of economic policy openness (such as the Shipping Connectivity Index (SHP), Financial Freedom (FIN), Trade Freedom (TRA), Investment Freedom (INV), and Government Expenditure (GOV)) have varying impacts, both positive and negative. It is worth noting that while geographical distance typically increases transportation costs and transit time, the results are the opposite. The possible reason is that the positive impact of economic scale and market demand on agricultural exports may outweigh the negative impact of distance. Large economies with high demand levels can offset the costs associated with distance and cultural differences, supporting Hypothesis 5. Furthermore, China's agricultural exports to ASEAN exhibit significant differences across different product categories (such as animal products, plant products, animal and vegetable oils, food and beverages, and tobacco), showing a distinct segmented commodity structure, verifying Hypothesis 6. The per capita carbon emissions (CARBON) of ASEAN countries have a significant positive impact on China's exports of different categories of agricultural products, indicating that ASEAN's transition to a low-carbon economy has changed demand preferences and affected the structure of China's agricultural exports, thus confirming Hypothesis 7.

 

6. Policy Recommendations

First, Increase Investment in Agriculture and Enhance Agricultural Production Technology and Efficiency. To further boost China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, the government should intensify investment in agriculture, particularly supporting the advancement of agricultural production technology and efficiency. By strengthening China's gross agricultural output, it will effectively facilitate the growth of agricultural exports, enabling China to secure a larger share in the international market.

Second, Leverage Geographical Advantages and Strengthen Cross-Border Trade Cooperation with ASEAN Countries Sharing Common Borders:
Given the positive influence of shared borders on certain product categories, the government should actively promote cross-border trade cooperation with ASEAN nations that share borders. By harnessing geographical advantages and reducing logistics costs, China can further augment its agricultural exports to these countries, thereby enhancing its competitiveness in the ASEAN market.

Third, Conduct In-depth Research on Cultural Differences in ASEAN Countries and Formulate Precise Marketing Strategies:
In response to the negative impact of shared language on agricultural exports, both the government and enterprises should delve deeper into the cultural disparities in ASEAN nations. By crafting targeted marketing strategies, China can effectively circumvent cultural barriers that hinder exports, thereby elevating the acceptance of Chinese agricultural products in the ASEAN market and expanding market share.

Fourth, Strengthen Agricultural Cooperation and Exchanges with ASEAN Countries and Keep Abreast of Agricultural Development Trends:
The growth of ASEAN countries' gross agricultural output exerts a notable positive influence on China's agricultural exports. Consequently, the government should foster closer agricultural cooperation and exchanges with ASEAN nations, staying informed about ASEAN's agricultural development trends. This will facilitate the adjustment and optimization of China's agricultural export structure to cater to ASEAN market demands, ultimately enhancing export performance.

Fifth, Promote Economic Policy Liberalization in ASEAN Countries and Reduce Trade Barriers.Given the mixed effects of economic policy openness in ASEAN nations, the government should actively engage in economic cooperation with ASEAN countries, driving forward the liberalization of trade, finance, shipping, and other sectors. By signing free trade agreements, establishing economic and trade cooperation mechanisms, and other means, China can reduce trade barriers and uncertainties, thereby fostering a more conducive environment for agricultural exports.

Sixth, Optimize the Export Commodity Structure Based on ASEAN Market Demands.Acknowledging the distinctive segmented commodity structure characteristics of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, the government and enterprises should tailor their export commodity mix to ASEAN countries' specific needs. By augmenting the market share of competitive segmented commodities, China can further consolidate and expand its position in the ASEAN market, enhancing its overall competitiveness.

Seventh, Address ASEAN Countries' Low-Carbon Environmental Demands and Boost Exports of Low-Carbon Agricultural Products.Amidst the low-carbon economic transformation, the varying per capita carbon emissions in ASEAN countries exert heterogeneous influences on China's agricultural exports. Consequently, the government and enterprises should pay heed to ASEAN's evolving low-carbon environmental needs, particularly by increasing exports of plant products, animal and vegetable fats and oils, and other low-carbon agricultural products. By satisfying ASEAN's low-carbon demands, China can further enhance the competitiveness of its agricultural products in the ASEAN market, fostering sustainable growth in agricultural exports.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper is well crafted and well explained.

However, there some questions that need explanation regarding the results, discussion and conclusion.

What could be the reasons for fluctuations of the exports to Myanmar and sharp decrease in animal products.

How can exports from China to Cambodia, which is limited, can be increased, as the authors say it needs to be increased. 

Elaborate, "China’s agricultural exports; ....... whether there is a common language are negatively correlated with agricultural exports."

Generally speaking, when there is common language for communication, it should lead to overcome any hindrance or misunderstanding between the two parties rather smoothly and should be positively correlated with the agricultural exports. 

What would be the subtle meaning of this writeup and why, ".... China’s agricultural exports in terms of whether or not there is a common language [6,7], contrary to the original hypothesis, suggesting that Chinese cultural identity has not become a favorable cultural factor for China's agricultural exports to ASEAN", especially when more of the ASEAN traders may have roots in China and even may be termed as "Chinese Traders/Businessmen" locally.

How can this negative correlation be related to, " Second, the impact of foreign agricultural products should pay more attention to the export of traditional Chinese farming culture and strengthen cultural identity " where Chineseness is emphasized.

How can "Fourth, we should create a freer trade environment, strengthen cooperation with 470 ASEAN countries, and promote the smooth flow of agricultural trade." realised, explain.

 

Author Response

Comments to the Author

However, there some questions that need explanation regarding the results, discussion and conclusion.What could be the reasons for fluctuations of the exports to Myanmar and sharp decrease in animal products.How can exports from China to Cambodia, which is limited, can be increased, as the authors say it needs to be increased.

Authors' Response:

Thank you for your careful review of the paper and your valuable suggestions. I have carefully considered the issues you raised regarding the results, discussion, and conclusion sections, and have made comprehensive revisions accordingly.Regarding the reasons for the volatility of Myanmar's exports and the sharp decline in animal product exports that you mentioned, I have conducted a detailed analysis and provided explanations in the revised discussion section, striving to make the conclusions more accurate and persuasive.Meanwhile, concerning the question you raised about how to increase China's exports to Cambodia, I have also conducted a thorough exploration in the policy recommendations section and proposed some specific suggestions and measures.

The revised part is as following:

Conclusions and Discussions

Based on panel data of China's agricultural export trade to eight ASEAN countries from 2007 to 2020, this study empirically examines the spatiotemporal evolution and product differences of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN by measuring the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to these countries. The study employs a stochastic frontier gravity model to analyze the core factors affecting China's agricultural exports.The results reveal that China's agricultural exports to ASEAN mainly include plant products, food and beverages, and tobacco, with animal products mainly exported to Thailand, plant products mainly to Vietnam, and animal and vegetable oils, fats, food and beverages, and tobacco mainly to Malaysia.

Further analysis shows that China's agricultural gross domestic product (ACGDP) has a significant positive impact on agricultural exports to ASEAN, confirming Hypothesis 1. The presence of a common border (BOR) has varying effects on different product categories, generally showing a positive impact on some categories while having insignificant or even negative effects on others, partially confirming Hypothesis 2. Conversely, the presence of a common language (LANG) has a significant negative impact on agricultural exports, contrary to conventional expectations. The possible reason is that the use of a common language does not automatically translate into effective marketing and communication strategies. Differences in marketing channels, promotional methods, and packaging may hinder the acceptance of agricultural products in the target market, reflecting the complex role of cultural factors in agricultural trade and thus confirming Hypothesis 3. The agricultural gross domestic product (AGDP) of ASEAN countries also has a positive impact on China's agricultural exports, indicating that the increase in ASEAN's agricultural production drives the demand for Chinese agricultural products, verifying Hypothesis 4. The indicators of economic policy openness (such as the Shipping Connectivity Index (SHP), Financial Freedom (FIN), Trade Freedom (TRA), Investment Freedom (INV), and Government Expenditure (GOV)) have varying impacts, both positive and negative. It is worth noting that while geographical distance typically increases transportation costs and transit time, the results are the opposite. The possible reason is that the positive impact of economic scale and market demand on agricultural exports may outweigh the negative impact of distance. Large economies with high demand levels can offset the costs associated with distance and cultural differences, supporting Hypothesis 5. Furthermore, China's agricultural exports to ASEAN exhibit significant differences across different product categories (such as animal products, plant products, animal and vegetable oils, food and beverages, and tobacco), showing a distinct segmented commodity structure, verifying Hypothesis 6. The per capita carbon emissions (CARBON) of ASEAN countries have a significant positive impact on China's exports of different categories of agricultural products, indicating that ASEAN's transition to a low-carbon economy has changed demand preferences and affected the structure of China's agricultural exports, thus confirming Hypothesis 7.

This study makes marginal contributions in several aspects. Firstly, it introduces per capita carbon emissions of ASEAN countries as an explanatory variable into the stochastic frontier gravity model, enriching the literature by analyzing the impact of the low-carbon economic transition on China's agricultural exports. Secondly, through segmented product analysis, it reveals differences in export efficiency and potential across various agricultural product categories, providing more targeted policy recommendations. Thirdly, by incorporating low-carbon economic factors, it offers a new perspective on understanding changes in the agricultural trade pattern against the backdrop of global climate change. Lastly, based on panel data spanning a long time horizon, it provides empirical evidence for the efficiency and potential of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, facilitating deeper cooperation between China and ASEAN in the agricultural sector.

Despite the achievements, this study also has limitations. Due to data unavailability, Brunei and Laos were excluded from the sample, potentially affecting the representativeness of the findings. Future research should strive to obtain more comprehensive data to improve sample coverage. Additionally, this study focuses primarily on static analyses of export efficiency and potential; dynamic mechanisms, such as changes in trade network structures and market demand fluctuations, could be further explored to gain a more holistic understanding of agricultural export dynamics.

6. Policy Recommendations

First, Increase Investment in Agriculture and Enhance Agricultural Production Technology and Efficiency. To further boost China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, the government should intensify investment in agriculture, particularly supporting the advancement of agricultural production technology and efficiency. By strengthening China's gross agricultural output, it will effectively facilitate the growth of agricultural exports, enabling China to secure a larger share in the international market.

Second, Leverage Geographical Advantages and Strengthen Cross-Border Trade Cooperation with ASEAN Countries Sharing Common Borders:
Given the positive influence of shared borders on certain product categories, the government should actively promote cross-border trade cooperation with ASEAN nations that share borders. By harnessing geographical advantages and reducing logistics costs, China can further augment its agricultural exports to these countries, thereby enhancing its competitiveness in the ASEAN market.

Third, Conduct In-depth Research on Cultural Differences in ASEAN Countries and Formulate Precise Marketing Strategies:
In response to the negative impact of shared language on agricultural exports, both the government and enterprises should delve deeper into the cultural disparities in ASEAN nations. By crafting targeted marketing strategies, China can effectively circumvent cultural barriers that hinder exports, thereby elevating the acceptance of Chinese agricultural products in the ASEAN market and expanding market share.

Fourth, Strengthen Agricultural Cooperation and Exchanges with ASEAN Countries and Keep Abreast of Agricultural Development Trends:
The growth of ASEAN countries' gross agricultural output exerts a notable positive influence on China's agricultural exports. Consequently, the government should foster closer agricultural cooperation and exchanges with ASEAN nations, staying informed about ASEAN's agricultural development trends. This will facilitate the adjustment and optimization of China's agricultural export structure to cater to ASEAN market demands, ultimately enhancing export performance.

Fifth, Promote Economic Policy Liberalization in ASEAN Countries and Reduce Trade Barriers.Given the mixed effects of economic policy openness in ASEAN nations, the government should actively engage in economic cooperation with ASEAN countries, driving forward the liberalization of trade, finance, shipping, and other sectors. By signing free trade agreements, establishing economic and trade cooperation mechanisms, and other means, China can reduce trade barriers and uncertainties, thereby fostering a more conducive environment for agricultural exports.

Sixth, Optimize the Export Commodity Structure Based on ASEAN Market Demands.Acknowledging the distinctive segmented commodity structure characteristics of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN, the government and enterprises should tailor their export commodity mix to ASEAN countries' specific needs. By augmenting the market share of competitive segmented commodities, China can further consolidate and expand its position in the ASEAN market, enhancing its overall competitiveness.

Seventh, Address ASEAN Countries' Low-Carbon Environmental Demands and Boost Exports of Low-Carbon Agricultural Products.Amidst the low-carbon economic transformation, the varying per capita carbon emissions in ASEAN countries exert heterogeneous influences on China's agricultural exports. Consequently, the government and enterprises should pay heed to ASEAN's evolving low-carbon environmental needs, particularly by increasing exports of plant products, animal and vegetable fats and oils, and other low-carbon agricultural products. By satisfying ASEAN's low-carbon demands, China can further enhance the competitiveness of its agricultural products in the ASEAN market, fostering sustainable growth in agricultural exports.

 

Comments to the Author

Elaborate, "China’s agricultural exports; ....... whether there is a common language are negatively correlated with agricultural exports."Generally speaking, when there is common language for communication, it should lead to overcome any hindrance or misunderstanding between the two parties rather smoothly and should be positively correlated with the agricultural exports. What would be the subtle meaning of this writeup and why,How can this negative correlation be related to, " Second, the impact of foreign agricultural products should pay more attention to the export of traditional Chinese farming culture and strengthen cultural identity " where Chineseness is emphasized.

Authors' Response:

Thank you very much for your careful review and valuable feedback. I have added and supplemented this content in the discussion section, elaborating on the possible reasons. I have attempted to analyze this seemingly contradictory phenomenon from multiple angles, including cultural differences, trade barriers, market access conditions, and other factors that may affect agricultural exports, and explained why, in this context, a common language may not be the primary determinant of agricultural exports.I hope the revised content can more clearly convey my viewpoint.

The revised part is as following:

Conversely, the presence of a common language (LANG) has a significant negative impact on agricultural exports, contrary to conventional expectations. The possible reason is that the use of a common language does not automatically translate into effective marketing and communication strategies. Differences in marketing channels, promotional methods, and packaging may hinder the acceptance of agricultural products in the target market, reflecting the complex role of cultural factors in agricultural trade and thus confirming Hypothesis 3.

 

Comments to the Author

How can "Fourth, we should create a freer trade environment, strengthen cooperation with 470 ASEAN countries, and promote the smooth flow of agricultural trade." realised, explain.

Authors' Response:

Thank you very much for reviewing my article and providing valuable suggestions. I have revised the policy recommendation section overall based on your feedback, and provided detailed explanations and elaborations on the point you raised: "Fourth, we should create a freer trade environment, strengthen cooperation with ASEAN countries, and promote the smooth circulation of agricultural trade." In the current countermeasures and suggestions, this point is in the fifth position, and I have given a detailed description of its implementation methods.

The revised part is as following:

Fifth, Promote Economic Policy Liberalization in ASEAN Countries and Reduce Trade Barriers.Given the mixed effects of economic policy openness in ASEAN nations, the government should actively engage in economic cooperation with ASEAN countries, driving forward the liberalization of trade, finance, shipping, and other sectors. By signing free trade agreements, establishing economic and trade cooperation mechanisms, and other means, China can reduce trade barriers and uncertainties, thereby fostering a more conducive environment for agricultural exports.

 

Comments to the Author

What could be the reasons for fluctuations of the exports to Myanmar and sharp decrease in animal products.

Authors' Response:

Thank you for your feedback. The fluctuation of exports to Myanmar and the sharp decline of animal products may be due to the low level of customs clearance facilitation between China and Myanmar, such as complicated approval procedures, backward customs clearance facilities in Myanmar and low level of customs personnel, serious smuggling of agricultural products along the border between China and Myanmar, and inconsistent safety certification, inspection and testing standards of agricultural products.

 

Comments to the Author

Elaborate, "China’s agricultural exports; ....... whether there is a common language are negatively correlated with agricultural exports."

Generally speaking, when there is common language for communication, it should lead to overcome any hindrance or misunderstanding between the two parties rather smoothly and should be positively correlated with the agricultural exports. 

What would be the subtle meaning of this writeup and why, ".... China’s agricultural exports in terms of whether or not there is a common language [6,7], contrary to the original hypothesis, suggesting that Chinese cultural identity has not become a favorable cultural factor for China's agricultural exports to ASEAN", especially when more of the ASEAN traders may have roots in China and even may be termed as "Chinese Traders/Businessmen" locally.

 

Authors' Response:

Thank you for your valuable suggestion. Based on your feedback, I have revised the assumption. Whether there is a common language is negatively correlated with the export of agricultural products, which may be because although the common language is a carrier to promote cross-cultural communication between the two sides of the trade, it may be used differently in different cultural environments. Different cultural backgrounds, ways of thinking, values and customs of different countries should be fully considered. Sometimes the same word will express different meanings, which will cause disputes and misunderstandings, which will increase the cost of trade.

The revised part is as following:

H3: A common language between the two countries has a positive impact on the growth of China's agricultural exports to ASEAN.