Milk Quality and Economic Sustainability in Dairy Farming: A Systematic Review of Performance Indicators

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title and abstract need to be improved - The systematic review covers developed countries and there are major differences when compare developed and developing countries (as correctly stated by authors). However, there is no indication in the title and/or in the abstract that results are valid only for developed countries.

Authors are using apropriate methodology. Results are presented correctly as well the conclusions. There is no need to improve the qualty of english language.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript “The Effectiveness of Economic and Financial Interventions in Promoting Milk Quality on Dairy Farms: A Systematic Review” employs a systematic literature review (PRISMA) in order to identify economic sustainability indicators applied by researchers to analyze the situation on dairy farms during the period 2000–2023. Authors spent many laborious hours on this research and the manuscript leaves a good impression. The research is presented in a well-structured manner and the methodology is clear. However, the manuscript demonstrates a lack of the accent on the identification of the research gap in a broader relevant and up-to-date research context and the highlight of the scientific focus and the value of this contribution. This issue is critical and must be addressed during the revision. The following comments require your careful consideration.

Title

The title of the manuscript must be revised. Results do not show effectiveness of economic and financial interventions in promoting milk quality. Interventions are not discussed while the accent on milk quality is not clear (omitted from the abstract, the research questions, and introduction).

Abstract

Kindly follow Instructions for Authors („Place the question addressed in a broad context and highlight the purpose of the study“, https://www.mdpi.com/journal/dairy/instructions) and revise the abstract.

The abstract (and introduction) leaves the impression that Authors analyze indicators applied on farms („..this study employs a systematic literature review (SLR) to meticulously identify the most frequently utilized economic and managerial performance indicators within dairy farms“, L464, etc.). However, the manuscript shows only academic research that could differ from reality. As a result, Authors argue that the EU dairy farms did not use such indicators as ROI, ROA, and etc. during the period 2000–2023. Thus, Authors are encouraged to select appropriate words that show the research limitation in Abstract and Introduction.

Introduction

According to Instructions for Authors, “the introduction should briefly place the study in a broad context and highlight why it is important. It should define the purpose of the work and its significance... The current state of the research field should be reviewed carefully and key publications cited...“. This manuscript pays excessive attention to the importance of the dairy sector, differences between developed and developing countries, and global trends in dairy sector. When Authors put their study in a broad context, they cite studies dated 2001, 1972, 2004, 2016, 2022, 2010, 2013, 2007, 2009, 2023, 1968, 2023 (self-citation), 1987, 1990. To sum up, about 4/5 of academic contributions that demonstrate a broader context of the study are more than 5 years old. It gives the impression of nonrelevant and nonsignificant academic contribution that is based on obsolete research. Authors are encouraged to change this situation (adding up-to-date references) and to explain their contribution to the academic discourse as well as to highlight the value of this study.

The abstract argues that Authors identify economic and managerial performance indicators, L135 states that Authors identify sustainability indicators and evaluate them, L139 declares that Authors analyze economic sustainability indicators. What is the real purpose (aim) of this study? Does this manuscript provide the evaluation criterion and evaluate sustainability indicators? Kindly add a clear research aim to abstract and introduction.

An important remark about the word „Europe“ (L45, L47, L183, etc.). First, L47 argues that Europe is an advanced country, L45 classifies Europe as a mature market. Europe is not a country; Europe is a continent that hosts developed and developing countries. Second, Authors must revise Materials and Methods and explain that they take this fact into consideration and remove developing countries from the list. In fact, Authors followed this procedure, however, this important issue was not mentioned.

L69: the reference 14 or names of researchers must be added.

Methodology

Materials and Methods should be described with sufficient details to allow others to replicate and build on published results. The current version of the manuscript does not identify papers that were selected for the analysis. Although the description of PRISMA 2020 recommends including checklists as a supplementary material, Authors are not obliged to show checklists. However, the list of the investigated papers is important. Kindly add it as a supplementary material or explanatory text. The integration of sources into one of the Tables is also a viable option to solve this problem.

According to the methodology, Authors include into their research only papers that are available in English. L355 refers to the paper that uses the Italian language. Kindly change the description of the methodology if this paper is on the list, otherwise ignore this remark.

The aforementioned issue of the continental Europe must be addressed and the relevant corrections added.

Fig. 1. Kindly double check the number in “Reports assessed for eligibility”.

L224: Country of publication or Country of research?

Results

Fig. 2: the font must be changed (keywords are not readable).

Table 1 shows herd performance twice. Costs of goods sold per unit are not explained in a text (removal is suggested).

L306: What is the origin of this data?

L402-410: Kindly double check Table 6 and the text.

L506: What do you mean by “milk production for energy”?

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Perfect academic vocabulary, minor mistakes (for example, by products)

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Using SLA method, This study identify the most frequently utilized economic and managerial performance indicators within dairy farms. The author has given a full explanation to the design of the screening criteria and further highlighted the significance of the research, therefore, I suggest to accept.