Will Agricultural Infrastructure Construction Promote Land Transfer? Analysis of China’s High-Standard Farmland Construction Policy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article analyzes the impact and mechanism of China's high standard farmland construction policy on land transfer. The research results are relatively reliable. However, there are issues with the production of figures and the content of the article, which require some degree of modification. Specific suggestions are as follows:
1. The abstract is too long. Suggest shortening according to the requirements of the journal.
2. It is suggested to add a description of the relationship between high standard farmland and land transfer after the first sentence of the abstract.
3. When introducing policies related to land transfer on Page 2, the introduction was not clear and specific enough. For example, the "three subsidiaries" reform policy is difficult for international readers to understand in the current language of the manuscript. It is recommended to revise it.
4. Suggest adding an introduction and definition of agricultural scale in the Introduction section. In addition, the last paragraph of the Introduction, which reads "This study integrates the two factors into a unified framework and uses a difference in differences model based on panel data from 2005 to 2017 as well as high-level farming and construction data from 2018 to 2020 to analyze the impact of the high-level farming and construction policy on land transfer and its underlying mechanisms," lacks clear support. It is suggested to add this section. Additionally, would it be more appropriate to place this part in the methods section?
5. 2.2.1 Some research concepts, such as the specific concept of "high standard farmland", are suggested to be supplemented.
6. Is the reason for restricting agricultural mechanization in 2.2.2.1 solely due to the dispersion of agricultural land? Other reasons such as farmers themselves and policy propaganda infiltration need to be supplemented.
7. In 2.2.2.2, the author cites the previous viewpoint that "The quality of cultivated land can be improved by improving soil permeability and water and fertilizer conservation capacity, Which helps to reduce the required factor inputs and thus the total production costs (Geng et al., 2021) [26] ". Page 3 mentions" However, Other scholars have noted their problems and found that the construction of high standard farmland will damage the local ecosystem and change the geological environment, which in turn causes soil erosion in the rainy season, reduces the ability of soil to retain water and fertilizers, and causes environmental damage (Abiodun et al., 2018) [31]. "Different scholars have different views on the impact of high standard farmland construction on water and fertilizer retention, and how does the author view it?
8. Suggest providing a detailed introduction to the significant advantages of the DID model used in the article compared to other methods.
9. What is the research method of this article, as the current content of section 2.2.4 Explained variable is based on the usage methods of previous scholars? What innovations are there? Suggested explanation.
10. It is recommended to specify the data source in sections 2.2.4, 2.2.5, 2.2.6, and 2.2.7.
11. Is there any literature reference for the control variables selected by the author in 2.2.6 Control Variables? In addition, it is suggested to briefly explain how they affect farmland transfer to enhance the persuasiveness of selecting these variables.
12. The discussion in section 3.2.3.2 “thus indicating that the model is robust” is not sufficient, and it is suggested to supplement it.
13. 3.2.4 Heterogeneity analysis section, the author analyzed heterogeneity in China from different perspectives, but since it is based on provinces as the research unit, it is recommended to supplement heterogeneity analysis for each province.
14. Can you explain in section 3.2.4.3 Heterogeneity of physical location that there are other criteria besides crop cultivation to distinguish between the north and south in this study? The author's description of the north and south of China is not very clear. In fact, rice is also grown in the north (such as rice in Northeast China), and there are plains and mountains in both the south and north. If the author wants to prove their hypothesis, it is recommended to group mountainous provinces and plain provinces for regression analysis.
15. The article calculates the entire China, but in reality only considers provinces as the smallest research unit. Does this mean that the author believes that the gap within provinces is very small? Or is there little geographical difference across the country?
16. Suggest adding a discussion section, such as the policy recommendations, limitations, and prospects in the conclusion, which can be included in the discussion. It is also possible to further discuss the significance of this study, as well as the similarities or differences with previous research. As a social science article, there should be detailed discussions. Currently, this section of the article seems to be only some vague macro strategies, which do not reflect the unique methods used in the article.
17. Figure and formatting issues:
（1）The vertical axis in Figure 1 is not clearly defined. It is recommended to add annotations to the left and right axes to distinguish the proportion of high standard farmland and land transfer. In addition, in Figure 1, there is an overlap between the 2011 text and the columns. It is recommended to make modifications.
（2）The proportion of land transfer area in Figure 1 appeared in 2011, and in Figure 4 it appeared in 2014. Please explain the reasons.
（3）Suggest enlarging Figure 2 slightly to connect 2.2.2.1 with the relevant content on the next page.
（4）Don't understand which of the following items correspond to path1, path2, and path3 in Table 7. Suggest modifying them.
（5）Please choose the citation method according to the requirements of the journal, and do not use two citation methods at the same time.
（6）It is not recommended to have four level headings in the article. It is suggested to reorganize the structure of the article.
（7）The information that can be read in the article figures is limited, and there is no display unit or vertical axis annotation. The figure format is not rich enough, it is recommended to adjust. Lack of visualization of the research area.
（8）Figure 4 is very similar in form to Figure 1, but the vertical axis is not the same, which can easily be misunderstood as an increase in the proportion difference. Suggest modification.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors,
very intertesting work.
There are only a few minor suggestions for your paper.
Introduction: ok
Literature Review: Briefly define key terms like "high-standard farmland construction" to provide context for unfamiliar readers. You can also showcase the gap in the existing literature, particularly regarding long-term impacts and regional studies.
Materials and Methods: Mention any limitations or strengths of the data sources and present variables in a more intuitive manner for easier understanding.
Results: Highlight the most important statistical outcomes (i did not understand clealy the most important ones), such as the percentage increase in land transfer. Finally, when discussing mechanisms like improved agricultural conditions, explain their importance for readers that are maybe not familiar with the specifics eg of agricultural policies.
Best,
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Minor improvements
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe research issues chosen by the Authors are interesting from both a scientific and practical point of view. I rate the originality of the research idea highly. The Authors could focus on defining the purpose/objectives of their research both in the abstract and in subsection 2.2.2.3, showing, i.e. what they want to achieve by conducting the study.
It would be good if the Authors emphasized what their research contributes to the scientific achievements in a given topic. What are the limitations of the conducted study. There is a lack of information on possible methodological limitations to better understand the credibility of the research results. I suggest referring to alternative research methods and explaining why they were not used. It is important to present what limitations were encountered during the research.
In the conclusions (chapter 5), it would be good if the Authors added a phrase in relation to the research hypotheses put forward, referring to their confirmation, i.e. …”which confirms the adopted research hypothesis”.
The article requires editorial correction, including:
1) it seems that the Authors have omitted the order of the references used, i.e.:
- p. 2, the reference is missing the numbering, the order should be maintained: “Related research also shows that land transfer optimizes the allocation of agricultural land resources and improves agricultural production efficiency (Liu et al., 2019). – in the list Liu et al. appears as no. 33, and should be as 3.
- similarly p. 6. In the sentence: “In addition, agricultural mechanization enables farmers with large-scale operations to maximize their output, which in turn increases the likelihood of land transfer (Peter,2002)” – the number is missing, the list is 45, and should appear earlier, in accordance with the preserved order.
- p. 12, the sentence is missing the reference to the numbering: “The possible reasons for this finding are as follows. In the western region, although the policy implementation improves agricultural conditions and stimulates land transfer, the land transfer market remains relatively underdeveloped (Geng et al., 2021)”.
2) page 1 in the reference (Deininger, 2021) [1] missing "et al.".
3) The sentence is missing a footnote (p.2): The government has also pointed out that it is necessary to stabilize small farms, develop the land transfer market and accelerate the cultivation of moderate-scale farms under the principle of “implementing collective ownership, stabilizing farmers’ contracting rights and releasing land management rights.”
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe author made some modifications to the manuscript to improve its quality, but the modifications in Comments 1, 5, 14, and 16 were not sufficient. For example, Comment 16, the author's response "Overall, the research conclusion of this article is relatively close to the research results of many scholars, which further indicates that land consolidation projects such as high standard farming and construction will promote land circulation, facilitate the realization of large-scale agricultural operations, and accelerate the modernization of agriculture" is too simple. It is suggested to further expand it. Additionally, the line number provided by the author's response cannot correspond to the modified content.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor editing of English language required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
