Livelihoods and Perceptions of Climate Change among Dairy Farmers in the Andes: Implications for Climate Education
, Yenny Torres 1, Laura Puhl 2, Biviana N. Heredia 3, Jhenny Cayambe 4, Julio Hernán-González 5, Alexandra Torres 6, Marcelo Luna 7, Theofilos Toulkeridis 8 and Bolier Torres 9,10
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors of the article demonstrated a rather unconventional approach to the study of quite traditional phenomena, which in general makes this article somewhat original.
But at the same time, the article contains some points that give the opportunity to make a few remarks.
The introduction to the article is too long as for an introduction, and therefore somewhat vague.
Goals presented in the abstract are rather tasks. The objectives of the research are not properly formulated either in the abstract or in the introduction. Therefore, questions arise as to who this article is aimed at, i.e., who may be interested in it, what is the possible field of use of the obtained results. How can these results be used and for what? The answers to these questions should be reflected in the conclusions, because the conclusions in the presented version are somewhat unclear as conclusions.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please review the attached document.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments for authors
Dear authors,
Very interesting study, but some aspects must be reviewed:
- Specifying the hypothesis of the research must be made in the introduction part (I have seen that it is mentioned the purpose, and this purpose could be rephrased so as to become the research hypothesis)!
- In methodology part I don’t understand how many valid questionnaires you introduced in the study? All 170 dairy farmer households have answered to those 38 questions?
-In conclusion part your proposals for the future, it would be appropriate.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please review the attached document.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The study by Vargas-Burgos et al. assessed dairy farmers' perception of climate change and examined the association between farmers' demographics and herd structures with their knowledge of climate change. The manuscript provides valuable information for policymakers to design effective climate change adaptation programs, particularly in the Ecuadorian context. While the manuscript was well-organized, some edits in terms of proper punctuation usage, especially in compound sentences, would significantly enhance its readability. To strengthen the manuscript, specific feedback and suggestions are outlined as follows:
The abstract was effectively summarized, providing a concise overview of the main points.
Introduction
The introduction provides sufficient information to establish the need for the study, particularly in the context of developing countries. However, some information could be condensed. The second paragraph of the introduction section, which spans about 20 lines, unnecessarily summarizes findings from a single source. It would be more effective to include only relevant information on livestock production and the impact on farmers' livelihoods in a couple of sentences. This would allow for a smoother transition to the next part of the introduction. Additionally, there is no need to include a figure from the same source in the introduction section.
Material and methods
The study area was well described, including the map location, which provided a clear understanding of the geographic context.
The statistics were described in detail.
Results
When the p-value is around 0.08 or similar, the authors can describe a trend or inclination instead of claiming a statistically significant difference between the variables.
Table 2: I would appreciate clarification on the values in parentheses next to the variable 'age'. Could you please specify whether these values represent standard deviation or standard error? To ensure consistency and understanding, please provide a clear indication of this in all tables.
Some of the results need further improvement in terms of readability and clarity. For instance, in section 3.1.3, it is stated that the average herd size across all categories was 10. However, the sentence may give the impression that this average pertains only to the larger herds. It would be beneficial to consider rephrasing certain result descriptions using clearer and more polished English. This could help improve the overall readability and comprehension of the findings. I recommend applying the suggested feedback to all relevant parts of the results.
Figures: Overall, the figures were quite interesting. However, it would be helpful to provide explanations of the elements present in the figures within the captions. This would enable readers to better understand the components and context of each figure.
Discussion:
The authors provided a comprehensive analysis and interpretation of the results, offering valuable insights and connections to the existing body of knowledge. The discussion section demonstrated a strong understanding of the research topic and effectively contextualized the study's findings, both within the Ecuadorian context and from a broader perspective in similar areas. This increased the relevance and applicability of the study's findings beyond its immediate scope.
Some of the longer sentences in the results section need revision, particularly for clarity and readability. Additionally, it is important to review the proper usage of punctuation in compound sentences within the results section.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please review the attached document.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have made notable improvements to the manuscript by addressing the raised concerns from the previous feedback. I have no further comments to add.
