The Scarecrow as an Indicator of Changes in the Cultural Heritage of Rural Poland

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper could be interesting for the SUSTAINABILITY readers, but I think a long way off from being fit for publication. I strongly recommend to further investigate the literature, adding more references and to amplify all sections. 

The topics considered (Cultural Heritage, rural areas, Polarization of territory, and so on) are treated so superficially in all sections that it is not acceptable to see them in a journal like Sustainability.

For instance, I strongly suggest reading and quoting the following papers: 

Polarization topic Berry, B.J.I.; Baskin, C.W.; Christaller, W. Central Places in Southern Germany.  Geogr.1967, 43, 275–276 Garau, C., Desogus, G., & Coni, M. (2019). Fostering and Planning a Smart Governance Strategy for Evaluating the Urban Polarities of the Sardinian Island (Italy). Sustainability, 11(18), 4962. Cultural heritage and rural tourism Vecco, M. (2010). A definition of cultural heritage: From the tangible to the intangible. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11(3), 321-324. Backman, M., & Nilsson, P. (2018). The role of cultural heritage in attracting skilled individuals. Journal of Cultural Economics, 42(1), 111-138. Garau, C. (2015). Perspectives on cultural and sustainable rural tourism in a smart region: The case study of Marmilla in Sardinia (Italy). Sustainability, 7(6), 6412-6434.

The title and also the abstract must be revised, because they are too generic. The abstract does not focus well on the originality of the research.

The introduction must be structured better. In the Introduction section the authors must focus on the state of the art of research and must indicate how they intend to develop the article. In Purpose and goals of the research section the authors deal with the problem in a very superficial way. The literature section is completely missing. In general, quotes are not up to date, which questions the originality of the article.

 In order to enhance the clarity and readability of the document, the authors should give a more convincing explanation of why the localities of Iwkowa and Brzesko are considered as case studies.

I strongly recommend to amplify all sections, following the SUSTAINABILITY format: Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussions and Conclusions.

Author Response

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and comments. Following the suggestions, we included several improvements in the manuscript. Please see the attachment for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This study on “The scarecrow as an indicator of changes in cultural heritage of rural areas” deals with very interesting social and cultural aspects.

However, the paper needs a major revision in order to be published in a Journal as Sustainability because the organization of the work (purpose, materials and methods, results, and conclusions) cannot considered coherent, well-articulated and exhaustive.

The authors affirm that the purpose of their research is to investigate the past and present functions of the scarecrow in rural areas in Poland, Europe and the USA as an indicator of changes occurring in cultural heritage in these areas.

In reality, the study focuses only on the analysis of this situation (whether or not to use scarecrows nowadays) in two areas of Poland. No analysis is made about other countries in Poland as well as other regions of Europe or even nothing as far as concerned the United States (except the discussions at lines 64-89; 483-487). If such studies are still to be carried out and will be the subject of other publications, then this must be specified in the text at appropriate times and the text revised consequently.

Moreover, the questionnaire submitted to only 22 people cannot be considered representative of the situation and behaviour of Poland rural people.

Further, conclusions do not fully explain what this “change” consists in cultural heritage in Poland (and in fact it is limited to a restricted area). The dissertation is unclear.

Therefore, it is necessary to revise the working methodology and the paper structure, to establish what the aim is and to adequately achieve the results. It is necessary to increase the number of interviewees and the countries under investigation, and to develop the comparison with the rest of Europe and the USA. If this is not the case, the scope of the research should be reviewed.

Period at lines 419-424 is repeated in lines 426-431.

Author Response

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and comments. Following the suggestions, we included several improvements in the manuscript. Please see the attachment for details.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors improved a little the article, but I still think it's not suitable for publication. I suggested several articles with different original ideas from which to draw inspiration and no one was inserted.

The topics considered (Cultural Heritage, rural areas, Polarization of territory, and so on) are treated so superficially in all sections that it is not acceptable to see them in a journal like Sustainability. 

And, again, I strongly recommend to amplify all sections, following the SUSTAINABILITY format: Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussions and Conclusions.

Author Response

We wish to thank all contributors for their constructive comments.

As suggested, the paper has been expanded significantly and proofread. The introduction has been amplified with a review of the literature on sustainable development and cultural heritage. The literature review has been modified to include such problems as rural areas and sustainable rural development. International literature on scarecrows has been analysed in depth. Their rustic, primal nature was emphasised. Model scarecrows from different countries in the world have been presented. Legends and beliefs related to the scarecrow have been introduced. The cultural role of scarecrow in rural areas has been discussed. Next, cultural changes regarding the perception of the scarecrow have been depicted, including the replacement of the mannequin stuffed with straw by an electronic device.  The literature review has been expanded by a total of several dozen items compared to the original version. All publications suggested by the reviewers have been taken into consideration. Such a broad scope of analysis is rare on a global scale. The effort was further supported by results of fieldwork, in-depth interview. As suggested, the presentation of methodology has been expanded, and the discussion and summary have been reorganised and improved. The quality of the paper has improved and it is now a more comprehensive proposal supported with empirical research.

All the literature items listed by the Reviewer have been quoted in the manuscript:

1) Used in the text – number [51] (line 623)

2) Used in the text – number [49] (line 623)

3) Used in the text – number [16] (line 136)

4) Used in the text – number [18] (line 144)

5) Used in the text – number [49] (line 614)

Literature review on ‘cultural heritage and rural areas’ can be found on pages 3-4 (lines 112-166) and in the chapter entitled ‘The scarecrow as a part of cultural heritage of rural areas’. Issues related to ‘rural areas’ can be found on page four.

The literature review has been expanded:

The key issue in deliberations on sustainable development in the 1970s was the problem of dwindling natural resources in the face of progressing economic and demographic growth together with relevant environmental threats. The next decade brought a general definition of sustainable development. It states that sustainable development is the way of providing for the needs of the current generation without hindering the ability of future generations to meet their needs. It was not until the Rio de Janeiro summit that the environmental and socio-economic factors were considered equal. Sustainable development became a strategy for identifying and resolving economic, social, and environmental problems. Its essence is to ensure improved life quality for current and future generations through establishing the right proportions of three types of capital, economic, human, and environmental [57]. This applies to rural areas as well.

The literature offers multiple definitions of rural areas. The best-accepted one may be the traditional definition that the rural area is a physical space with a relatively low population density, scattered settlement structure, and extensive use of land [58]. Rural development is a persistent challenge everywhere, whether in advanced industrial and post-industrial economies or less developed settings [56]. The concept of sustainable rural development involves simultaneous effort towards improved life quality and continuous business operations in the areas. At the same time, it calls for the protection of specific rural resources such as the natural environment, landscape, or cultural heritage [57]. It may be a challenge as people with their holdings coexist in rural areas with nature to make up a specific whole. Interactions are unavoidable.

Research manuscript sections (acc. to MDPI): Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions (optional).

The paper has been restructured.

The new structure of the paper:

2.1. The scarecrow as a part of cultural heritage of rural areas

2.1.1. Stories, legends and customs

2.2. Scarecrows of the 21st century

2.2.1. High-tech scarecrow

2.2.2. Laser scarecrows

2.2.3. Smart scarecrow

2.2.4. Three-dimensional decoys

2.3. Who cares about scarecrows?

5.1. The condition and prospects of the development of agriculture in the Lesser Poland region of Poland

6. Conclusions

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have deeply revised the work following the indications of the referees and consulting the  literature indicated.

The title and scope of the work has been changed.

The working methodology has been revised as well as the entire structure of the text.

Now the text is more clear and consistent as well as the purpose of the research.

The discussion of the results and the conclusions are appropriate.

Author Response

We wish to thank all contributors for their constructive comments.