Review Reports - Forest Biological Disaster Control Behaviors of Forest Farmers and Their Spatial Heterogeneity in China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The publication contains excellent research on "Forest Biological Disasters: Control Behaviors of Forest Farmers and Their Spatial Heterogeneity in China." However, there are numerous areas of the document that need to be improved before it is considered fit for publication: The abstract does not convey the relevance of the findings.

Explain the practical aspects of FBD in the introduction. The introduction does not provide sufficient background on pesticide effects and their impact on farmer behavior and forests. However, the presentation of the study's aims and scope should be better organized and more cl ear. Although the materials and methods section provide thorough information on data gathering methods and survey procedures, Statistical analysis must explain why you selected these models.

The discussion provides some explanation of the findings, but it falls short of comparing them to earlier investigations.

To improve the manuscript's publication readiness, the authors should edit and clarify the abstract, introduction, materials and methods, findings, and discussion sections. They should also extensively check the manuscript for equation errors and inconsistencies. Furthermore, fixing any missing information and maintaining uniformity in formatting and citation style would improve the manuscript's overall quality.

Please provide a more accurate conclusion to your study.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate revisions are necessary.

Author Response

Q1:The abstract does not convey the relevance of the findings.

A1:We increased the relevance of the results in the abstract, such as: “The results indicated that, (1)Household factors: forest farmers could timely take control measures. An increase of 1 ha in the area of occurrence would increase the control measures by 3.26 ha. However, the control measures can only reduce 50% of the economic loss caused by FBDs, and cannot effectively control the spread trend of FBDs. There are issues including insufficient and old labor force, insufficient technology support, and low consciousness on ecology protection. (2)External factors: forest farmers would increase control when the temperature rises, while would reduce control when rainfall increases. And after village committees unified organizing the control, their participating enthusiasm would increase, while it has a substitution relationship with the household investment. (3)Regional difference:……”

Q2.Explain the practical aspects of FBD in the introduction.

A2:We have increased the specific introduction of FBD in terms of classification proportion, type quantity, etc. :“ Among them, diseases accounted for 22.68%, insect pests accounted for 61.87%, rabbit disasters accounted for 13.91%, and harmful plants accounted for 1.51% [7]. The average economic loss caused by FBDs exceeds $21.54 billion per year [8] . There are more than 8,000 species of forest pests in China, of which more than 300 are seriously threatened. ”

Q3:The introduction does not provide sufficient background on pesticide effects and their impact on farmer behavior and forests. .

A3:In the introduction, we have perfected the harm caused to ecological environment, forest and themselves if forest farmers do not control or use pesticides irrationally, such as:“ hence leading to the economic loss [19]. In addition, focusing only on their own economic interest, forest farmers are more likely to use highly toxic but low-cost pesticides[18, 20]. This kind of behaviors, using the chemically toxic but cheap pesticides would cause non-point source pollution and endanger ecological environmental safety. Even, if pests develop antibodies to pesticides, they would also lead to the ineffective input from forest farmers and endanger the health of humans and animals [22, 23].”

Q4.However, the presentation of the study's aims and scope should be better organized and more clear.

A5:We organized the study's aims and scope more clear as:“(1) to analyze the impact of household and external factors on FBD control behaviors of forest farmers using developed OLS and SEM models ; (2) to analyze the spatial heterogeneity (between the eastern and western regions) of forest farmers' control behaviors using propensity score matching method.

Q5.Although the materials and methods section provide thorough information on data gathering methods and survey procedures, Statistical analysis must explain why you selected these models.

A5：We added the reasons for model selection in the statistical analysis, such as:

Ols in 3.2:“In order to have a clearer understanding of the impact of funds, occurrence and loss, as well as plantation area, climate perception, labor input, and the organizational ability of village committees, on forest farmers' prevention and control behaviors, the OLS model was first used.”;

SEM in 3.2: “Furthermore, the control measures taken would also have an impact on the capital investment and its occurrence, and there may be endogeneity issue between the variables, which affects the regression efficiency. Hence, to overcome this issue the SEM model was developed.”

PSM in 3.3: “In order to analyze the spatial heterogeneity in control behaviors and economic-loss perception of forest farmers, the PSM method was used to explore the differences of control measures, capital investment, FBDs outbreak area, and economic losses between both sides of the "Hu line" with removing the differences of external conditions such as nature and environment. PSM could more clearly correct the influence of regional deviation on control behavior. ”

Q6:The discussion provides some explanation of the findings, but it falls short of comparing them to earlier investigations.

A6: We have added a comparison with earlier investigations, such as: “(1) In terms of control behaviors, the occurrence area and economic loss would significantly affect the control behaviors of forest farmers, which is consistent with that’s stated in the previous study, “if forest farmers realize the area of FBDs is larger and the resulting economic losses are more severe, they would be more conscious of taking control measures” [53, 55].

For an increase of 1 ha in the occurrence area, the control area would increase by 3.26 ha. And for an increase of 1 ha in the control area, it would reduce the loss of economic value by $ 751.31. However, the existing control measures cannot completely stop the spread/outbreak trend of FBDs. Increasing FBDs by 1ha would still cause an economic loss of $ 1354.14. These are generally consistent with the conclusion, that national control is "timely but inefficient", given by [63]. In addition, based on the survey, it was revealed that, in the control activities single-household control is still dominant (55.38%) with the issues of lack of fund, technical support and labor input, that negatively affect the control efficiency.

“The investment is relatively timely, with an average of 191 dollars per hectare for control. Households whose main income source is from forestry, would increase the pesticide input by $ 267.67. This conclusion is very consistent with what’s stated, ”If the households’ livelihood mainly relies on forestry income, they are more conscious of adopting management measures to obtain higher income” in the previous study[51]. However, the average income from forestry is just around 1,500 dollars per year for forest farmers. 54.4% of the respondents agreed with that pesticide causes environmental pollution, and 39.7% thought it would increases the economic cost. 68.7%of them purchase pesticides on their own, while their knowledge regarding pesticides 43.2% gained from life experience and 30.5% from business introduction. ”

“the control measures of forest farmers would increase by 0.33 ha if organization capacity of the village committee increase one unit. However, it has a substitution relationship with the willingness of forest farmers to purchase pesticides. That increase would lead to the decrease of the fund input from the forest farmers by $ 26.18. The survey indicated that 41.4% forest farmers hope the government can provide funds, organization and distribution of ecological pesticides, technical training(27.6%), and other forms of support. In order to alleviate the issues of forest land abandonment and the lack of labor and control technology caused by urbanization [50]”etc.

Q7:To improve the manuscript's publication readiness, the authors should edit and clarify the abstract, introduction, materials and methods, findings, and discussion sections. They should also extensively check the manuscript for equation errors and inconsistencies. Furthermore, fixing any missing information and maintaining uniformity in formatting and citation style would improve the manuscript's overall quality.

A7: We changed the equation errors and inconsistencies, supplemental information and maintaining uniformity in formatting and citation style.

Q8.Please provide a more accurate conclusion to your study.

A8:We divided the conclusion into two parts: conclusion, suggestion and study limitations. And divided the conclusion into three levels: "the impact of household factors on control behaviors", "the impact of external factors on control behaviors" and "the regional difference of control behaviors", so as to make the conclusion more clear and accurate.

The corresponding policy suggestions were put forward to solving the problems of foresters needing policy support, labor shortage, pesticide pollution and regional differences.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is well defined with high novelty. Also the article is written in an appropriate way and the data analysed and presented appropriately. The highest standards for presentation of the results used. The study designed and analyses performed with the highest technical standards.

To a future research to control of difficulties for different FBDs combined with the main control measure for Bursaphelenchus xylophilus who is cutting and burning the epidemic wood which leads to a big economic loss. However, it’s very challenging to include the differentiated control difficulties of different FBDs in this control behaviors study, and there is no literature thus far. Therefore, in the next step we would like to quantify the control difficulties of different FBDs to further this study.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your suggestion, we have carefully proofread and modified the manuscript according to the reviewers' suggestions, please check.

Best wishes!

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article raises a very important problem for the eastern and western parts of China - insufficient control of outbreaks and spread of harmful objects (diseases, insects, rodents, weeds). Studying the control behavior of forest farmers in China can help the development of forestry in the country as a whole. The topic and description of the article is relevant and has both theoretical and practical significance, which can be useful to both farmers and administrative (political) structures.

There are some questions and comments:

1. I recommend adding to the keywords the harmful objects discussed in the article - pathogens, pests, weeds.

2. In Chapter 2 there is a description by other researchers of why these methods were taken for research. In my opinion, it is better to place this in the discussion section, and in this chapter to clearly present the main criteria and calculation methods.

For example, lines 171-175, 178-183, 190-208, etc. from Chapter 2 can be transferred to the discussion.

3. It is not entirely clear how many points were taken from the eastern part of China for research, and how many from the western? Specify exactly in the text.

4. Is there data on specific hazards that have been affected by pesticide treatments in different areas? Squares? These data could also be of interest in these studies.

5. In chapter 2.4.1. The OLS model is presented. It is not clear who developed it and are there any references where it is mentioned about its suitability?

6. In Table 4, for better understanding, provide a footnote and explanation of all the variables presented in the first column.

Author Response

Q1:I recommend adding to the keywords the harmful objects discussed in the article - pathogens, pests, weeds.1.

A1:We add “Forest Diseases, Pests, Rodent or Hare Infestations, and Harmful Plants” in the keywords.

Q2: In Chapter 2 there is a description by other researchers of why these methods were taken for research. In my opinion, it is better to place this in the discussion section, and in this chapter to clearly present the main criteria and calculation methods. For example, lines 171-175, 178-183, 190-208, etc. from Chapter 2 can be transferred to the discussion.

A2: In Chapter 2 we more clearly present the main criteria and calculation methods such as “The income that forest farmers receive from forestry production is their main motivation take control measures to mitigate the loss of FBDs [51]. The larger area of the monoculture plantation, the higher risk of the occurrence of FBDs and the related loss [52, 53, 54] Therefore, the factors of the proportion of forestry income in the overall household income, the area of planted forest, the area of FBDs and the amount of economic loss are selected. In addition, forest farmers' awareness on the control would affect the adoption of specific control measures and enthusiasm on the control of forest farmers [55]. Therefore, the indicator of the forest farmer's knowledge about FBD control is selected in the questionnaire.

In addition to the household-related factors, the external factors such as climate conditions and policies may affect the control behaviors of forest farmers [47, 57,58]. Therefore, the indicators of climate and rainfall increase perception are selected.

And transferred your suggested lines to the discussion, such as: “In terms of control behaviors, the occurrence area and economic loss would significantly affect the control behaviors of forest farmers, which is consistent with that’s stated in the previous study, “if forest farmers realize the area of FBDs is larger and the resulting economic losses are more severe, they would be more conscious of taking control measures” [53, 55].

Households whose main income source is from forestry, would increase the pesticide input by $ 267.67. This conclusion is very consistent with what’s stated, ”If the households’ livelihood mainly relies on forestry income, they are more conscious of adopting management measures to obtain higher income” in the previous study[51].”

Q3:It is not entirely clear how many points were taken from the eastern part of China for research, and how many from the western? Specify exactly in the text.

A3:In the data collection, we added:“Among them, a total of 437 sets of data were obtained from the eastern region where Guangdong and Shandong are located, and 381 sets of data were obtained from the western region where Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia are located.”

Q4.Is there data on specific hazards that have been affected by pesticide treatments in different areas? Squares? These data could also be of interest in these studies.

A4: In the result of 3.1.2, we added the hazards of pesticide after the the name of using pesticide, such as:”Therefore, in terms of the impact of pesticides on farmers' lives, 56.22% and 49.38% of the respondents from the eastern and western regions, respectively, believed that the use of pesticides would damage the environment and cause air and water pollution. Then it would increase the cost of household input (52.21% in the east, 31.12% in the west). Additionaly, the west side believes that pesticides would reduce food safety (19.09%) which is higher than that in the east side (11.24%). Moreover, a small number of forest farmers believe that pesticides wouldaffect the quality and sales of forest products (10.84% in the east, 6.22% in the west), make themselves or their families sick (9.64% in the east, 4.15% in the west), and even cause livestock to get sick and other hazards (4.02% in the east and 0.83% in the west).”

Q5: In chapter 2.4.1. The OLS model is presented. It is not clear who developed it and are there any references where it is mentioned about its suitability?

A5: we add the developer and the suitability as “OLS is the most commonly used estimation method for single-equation linear regression models, which minimizes the error sum of squares with respect to the regression parameters [61]. OLS are based on the assumptions of the relationship between the study variable and explanatory variables is linear, at least approximately, and the error term has zero mean, constant variance, uncorrelated and normally distributed [62]. ”

Q6. In Table 4, for better understanding, provide a footnote and explanation of all the variables presented in the first column.

A6: We used the whole words for more easy to understand as:”Plantation area (PA), The perception of temperature increase (TI),……The organization control ability of village committee (VC)”