Efficiency and Driving Factors of Agricultural Carbon Emissions: A Study in Chinese State Farms
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
The manuscript titled "Efficiency and Driving Factors of Agricultural Carbon Emissions: A Study in Chinese State Farms" is an important and emerging field of research pertaining to the climate change phenomenon faced by the global stakeholders. The title accurately reflects the content and scope of the study. I have gone through the entire MS and few suggestions and queries before it can pass the review process. Few general points that need to be looked upon are:
- Ensure consistency in the use of terminology, particularly when discussing different models and methods.
- Proofread for minor grammatical errors and ensure that all references are correctly formatted according to the journal's guidelines.
Section specific comments
1. The abstract is concise and informative, however I suggest adding a sentence or two on the specific implications for policy and practice to enhance the abstract's relevance.
2. The introduction sets the context by discussing the importance of low-carbon agriculture and the role of Chinese state farms. While the introduction covers the importance of the topic and previous studies, clearly stating what is missing in the current literature and how this study addresses that gap would strengthen the introduction. Consider refining the objectives section to clearly state the research questions or hypotheses. In addition, the research gap could be more explicitly stated.
3. In methods, authors need to clarify clarify why specific provinces (Tibet and Chongqing) were excluded due to data issues. Secondly, while the methodology section is detailed, providing a justification for the choice of methods (e.g., why the Super-SBM model was chosen over other models) would strengthen the rationale for the study design.
4. Results: While the results are clearly presented, providing a brief interpretation for each figure and table within the text would help the reader understand the significance of the data. Including a comparative analysis with similar studies or different regions could provide additional context and strengthen the findings.
5. While the discussion interprets the results well, it could benefit from a deeper exploration of the policy and practical implications of the findings. How can policymakers use this information? What are the next steps for practitioners? Clearly outlining suggestions for future research based on the study's findings would be beneficial. This could include areas that need further investigation or new methodologies that could be employed.
The conclusion could include more actionable recommendations for policymakers, practitioners, and future researchers. This would provide a stronger finish and practical utility to the study.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish language need little modifications.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview report for Agriculture-3044584
In this manuscript, authors developed and refined a framework to examine agricultural carbon emission efficiency tailored to the specific development conditions in Chinese state farms. They mentioned that this framework has theoretical value and can guide future research and policy development in sustainable agriculture. In fact, authors underscore that exploring the development characteristics of carbon emissions in Chinese state farms enriches the theoretical foundation of eco-friendly and low-carbon agriculture. They pointed out by examining these characteristics, it broadens the scope of research in sustainable agriculture.
This research tried to describe farms across 29 Chinese regions and calculated agricultural carbon emissions from 2010 to 2022 using the IPCC method. Authors employed the Super-SBM model, ML index, and LMDI method to analyze agricultural carbon emission efficiency and its driving factors, yielding the following conclusions. Authors reported that the carbon emissions in agricultural state farms exhibited three stages: increase, fluctuation, and decline. In fact, emissions from seven carbon sources showed varying degrees of increase. They remarked that the agricultural carbon emissions were concentrated mainly in the northern and eastern regions. Also, authors explained that the average agricultural carbon emission efficiency in China’s state farms was 0.92, indicating a high agricultural output per unit of emissions. They also reported that the technological progress was the primary factor enhancing agricultural carbon emission efficiency. Furthermore, authors remarked that the influence of various driving factors on carbon emissions was ranked in the following order: agricultural economic development level, agricultural production efficiency, agricultural labor scale, and agricultural industry structure.
In general, the subject addressed in the manuscript is very attractive and interesting, as well as beneficial for applied purposes. However, the manuscript needs a major revision before it acceptance. I also invite authors to completely and fully address the comments raised here. The comments are explained below.
1- Please explain and highlight the novelties of this research work with respect to the previously published papers, in the manuscript.
2- English language of manuscript needs a minor revision throughout the manuscript.
3- Please recheck this statement in the conclusion section. Thirdly, state farms should establish a modern employment system to improve labor productivity, encouraging workers to transition to urban areas and pursue market-based employment opportunities while actively recruiting agricultural technology experts and management professionals.
4- Please improve Figures 5, 6.
5- Please perform a statistical analysis on the obtained results.
6- In the statement of the abstract section, authors wrote, “The findings of this study can be useful for the pharmaceutical industry to optimize the drug manufacturing process and improve the drug's quality.”. Please discus on this statement in the manuscript with explaining more details and merit references.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Minor revision is needed.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview Report for agriculture-3141754-Revised
Authors addressed the reviewer’s comments. It is recommended accepting the manuscript at the present form.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Comments 1: Authors addressed the reviewer’s comments. It is recommended accepting the manuscript at the present form.
Response 1: Thank you for your positive feedback. We appreciate the time and effort you have taken to review our manuscript. As no specific changes were requested, we have carefully reviewed the manuscript once more to ensure its accuracy and clarity.
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReview Comments for Manuscript Improvement
I have reviewed the manuscript titled "Efficiency and Driving Factors of Agricultural Carbon Emissions: A Study in Chinese Agricultural Reclamation." The writing is good and information generated from this work has importance for furtherance of future research. The paper fits the scope of the journal. However, some amendments are needed before it is published. Here are my comments and suggestions:
The abstract effectively summarizes the study, outlining the methods and key findings. However, the language can be simplified for better readability. The implications of the findings are clearly stated, highlighting the importance of technological progress and economic development in influencing carbon emissions. The study effectively addresses the importance of promoting low-carbon agriculture in Chinese agricultural reclamation areas, emphasizing the need for tailored emission reduction and efficiency improvement plans. The manuscript could benefit from further elaboration on the specific methodologies used for calculating carbon emissions, analyzing emission efficiency, and decomposing influencing factors. Providing more details on the Super-Slack-Based Measure model, Malmquist-Luenberger index, and Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index methods would enhance the clarity of the research. The discussion section should critically analyze the findings, comparing them with existing literature. Ensure that any contradictions or unexpected results are addressed. It would be valuable to include a section discussing the limitations of the study, such as data availability, potential biases, or uncertainties in the calculations. Acknowledging these limitations would strengthen the credibility of the findings and recommendations. The manuscript should consider expanding on the practical implications of the research findings, particularly in terms of policy recommendations for sustainable agriculture development. Providing concrete suggestions for policymakers based on the study results would increase the manuscript's impact and relevance. Including visual aids such as graphs, charts, or maps to illustrate the spatiotemporal evolution of agricultural carbon emissions and emission efficiency trends would enhance the reader's understanding of the research findings. Lastly, the implications for policy and practice are well-articulated. This section could be expanded to provide more detailed recommendations.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageCan be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe reviewed article is related to the carbon dioxide emission assessment of agriculturally reclaimed areas. The authors also attempted to identify the factors influencing the emissions of this gas. This topic is extremely important in terms of achieving carbon neutrality. However, despite the authors' take on an important topic, I cannot recommend it for publication in its current state.Please add aslo information about the source of the data for Figure 1.
3. Were these reclamation areas associated with the extraction of the same deposits/ores. What about the lithology of particular reclamated areas?
My main objection to the reviewed article is that the calculated emission values are not related to the area of reclaimed land. Values are given in relation to a given province. The article lacks data on the location of the analysed reclaimed areas (a map of the delineations analysed would be extremely helpful for non-Chinese readers).
The study did not take into account the impact of crop rotations and reclamation technology, the lithology of the areas analysed. These factors could have had a huge impact on the carbon footprint. The emission values given refer to the province without taking into account the area of reclaimed soils, thus making it difficult to compare the areas. The description of the methodology of the work in the area of characterisation of the study area needs considerable clarification.
Below are some other comments on the work:
1. Plaese reconsider rewriting Introduction section. I do not know why the authors decided to deliminated both introduction and literature review sections. These two subchapters should have been combined into one coherent Introduction section.
2.Table 1, due to the way the data is presented, makes it impossible to observe changes in CO2 emissions associated with changes in fertiliser policy and consumption. Additionally, the authors did not mention whether there had been a change in the area of soils reclaimed into agriculture direction during the analysed period.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe study underscores the importance of developing tailored emission reduction and efficiency improvement plans that consider the specific conditions of different agricultural reclamation areas.Using this theoric study Super-SBM model, ML index, and LMDI method were employed to analyze agricultural carbon emission efficiency and its driving factors.
Minor revision
Correct the following reference 39...the title in capital letter should be small letter
Correct the reference 26
1- Clarify whether statistical tests have been performed to determine the significance of the observed differences in carbon emission efficiency. Report if there are p-values or other relevant metrics.
2-About regional differences, this section highlights regional variations in carbon emission efficiency. It would be beneficial to go deeper into the reasons behind these variations. Are there specific regional policies, technologies, or practices that contribute to higher or lower efficiency in some areas?
3-Discuss the implications of regional policies on carbon emissions and how they align with the national and international carbon reduction goals.
4-Compare your results with those of previous studies. Are the observed trends and efficiencies consistent with other findings in the literature?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript is ready for publication
Author Response
Comments 1: The manuscript is ready for publication.
Response 1: Thank you for your positive feedback. We appreciate the time and effort you have taken to review our manuscript. As no specific changes were requested, we have carefully reviewed the manuscript once more to ensure its accuracy and clarity.
