The Impact of Government Agricultural Development Support on Agricultural Income, Production and Food Security of Beneficiary Small-Scale Farmers in South Africa
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper focus on the impact of agricultural support received on the farmers’ food production, agricultural income and food security status in South Africa. Overall, this article is not well organized, the method is relatively simple, and the analysis is not sufficient.
1. In the introduction part, too many backgrounds information, however, your research target and plan are not clear. And the background is all about small farm system in Africa, so what about the government development support in this country? I cannot see what are the problems, how you will do, the research area and dataset in the first part.
2. The author should directly declare the contribution related to topic, methodology, or data of the paper in the introduction part.
3. What is the conceptual framework of this article, what is the theoretical analysis, and how to make theoretical connections to government support, agricultural income and food security in the study? I suggest the author make theoretical analysis and build a conceptual framework.
4. Regarding the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) estimation, PSM can solve the endogeneity problem caused by observable variables, but cannot solve the endogeneity problem caused by unobservable variables. This is should be mentioned and using appropriate method to compensate that drawback.
5. The variables used in the estimation should be defined and make descriptive calculation in the table, I did not see clearly that information.
6. When analyzing the determinants of farmers’ access to agricultural development support, the analysis and explanation of influencing factors are not detailed, such as age, race, and the situation of the study area is not well combined, just the analysis of the results.
7. I wonder about the results and policy implication, so why government support improve households’ income, while decrease food security?
Author Response
The paper have been re-organised and we have tried to add a literature on small-scale farmers and agric support in Africa and at the international perspective.
We have made the reduction in the background information and included problems regarding the agricultural development support .
With regard to PSM, i agree that PSM does not address the problem of Endogeneity and we are aware of the drawback. However the PSM attempts to correct this problem by ensuring that the treatment group under study are balanced with respect to measure covariates. Another technigue that takes care of this problem is the Endogenous switching regression model , but is a bit late to re-analyse the data.
The conceptual and theoritical analyses of the study has been edited and the policy implication of the study has been added on the conclusion section.
Reviewer 2 Report
This article put the subject of agricultural income, production, and food security .
I have serious problems with the way the paper has been written, the lack of detail in the theoretical framework, which is needed to more explain. The problem statement is not well described. The problem of research must be explained from different aspects (agricultural income, production, and food security).
In the introduction section, an explanation should be provided about relationship of among agricultural income, production, and especially food security. Furthermore, in the introduction, very old references have been provided. I highly suggest updating the introduction with recent references. You may review the given studies and cite them:
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063634
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.09.006
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100400
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102349
https://doi.org/10.1080/10371656.2021.1895471
Contribution of the study is not presented clearly. Authors have to describe it from different angles. How is this study different from other researches?
In the conclusion, please provide assumptions by which this study has been established. Research limitations and recommendation for future studies should be presented at the end of the conclusion section.
Author Response
The paper has been re-organised. We have updated the introduction part with more recent references.
The theoritical framework of the study have been explained in more detail.
Contribution of the study together with the research limitations have been added on the conclusion section.
Reviewer 3 Report
This is a comprehensive study on government support on small scale agriculture in South Africa based on the General Households Surveys. I'm wondering if the survey is conducted by the authors or a national survey conducted by a third party (institution) in South Africa. Can the authors tell more about the selection of sample and validity of data used in study like this. And how can analysis of this dataset contribute to the knowledge of government support and small scale farming.
The authors are obviously acquainted with small scaling farming in South Africa. But how is small scale farming similar or different from that in other places, for instance, China, can the authors make some comparison? In other words, there isn't enough literature review on the topic of "government support on small scale farmers", which I believe related studies can be found.
Presentation of some figures is also not very clear. It would be difficult to retrieve enough information or support the statement of the role of gender in small scale farming from the figure after section 3.
Minor issues include, for instance, figure number (there is not figure 1-7, but figure 8) and the layout of tables. Where is 3.1.
Author Response
We have updated more information on how the survey was conducted/and how the data was collected.
More figures that we missing have been added. and we have also added international perspective of the issue of agric development support.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
1. In the introduction part, I still did not see what exactly are the government development support in your research country.
2. The theoretical framework should not be under the introduction, but should be a separate part. And the framework are failure to build the theoretical connection between government development support and household income.
Author Response
I have added the government development support of the country that commenced in 1980 till date in the introduction section. I have also removed the theoritical framework on the introduction section and put it separately on section 2.
Reviewer 3 Report
The revision may address some concerns but It is unclear where the change has been made. There is no highlight throughout the text or response letter. The structure is still not very clear, both in logic and format. There seems no strong connection between the theoretical framework and theoretical model. In other words, the review of market failure seem not the sources of the model construction in 2.3. The paper states that the model is adapted from theory of net farm, then why not introduce it in the framework. I still feel it would be wired to have 1.1 without 1.2 or 1.3 follow after.
Format shall be revised: abstract, introduction Lack of policy cohesion”, 3.1 Descriptive analysis, author contribution, funding etc. It is not a pleasant reading of the texts.
Author Response
I have made revisions on the paper using track changes and formatted the structure of the paper.
I have re - arranged the structure of the paper. starting from Abstract, Introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion and the conclusion.
I have edited the theoritical framework of the study in order to connect with the theoritical model.