Analysis on the Trend and Factors of Total Factor Productivity of Agricultural Export Enterprises in China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is interesting. It pertains to the measurement of TFP, i.e. total factor productivity. This is a very important issue, because TFP and its main determinants are among the fundamental subjects in the theory of economic growth.
The authors of the study investigate Chinese agricultural enterprises. They make comparisons of the productivity between exporting and non-exporting producers. The aim of the research, among other things, is to show the differences in TFP between different companies. The authors of the article review the literature related to various methods of TFP measurement. They indicate the importance of the influence that different factors have on its measurement. This study refers to the research conducted by the authors.
The authors of the article try to prove the changes in TFP among agricultural enterprises from various industries in China, and try to answer the question of which factors lead to differences using statistical methods. The authors presented the obtained results in a descriptive, tabular and graphical manner.
According to the Reviewer, the article lacks a broader review of TFP itself and software used, i.e. Stata 15.0. Section 2.2. (Data) could be discussed more broadly and explain why particular enterprises were included in the analyzed data while others were rejected. In addition, an explanation of which branches of the agricultural industries were taken under consideration shall be added for clarification of further results. The selection of a sample of enterprises for research has a great impact on the analysis.
The article contains a wide range of literature. The study is interesting. The article is at a good level, but needs to be supplemented. I propose to admit it for publication after completion.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Thank you very much for the comments. This paper makes the following modifications.
The article is interesting. It pertains to the measurement of TFP, i.e. total factor productivity. This is a very important issue, because TFP and its main determinants are among the fundamental subjects in the theory of economic growth.
The authors of the study investigate Chinese agricultural enterprises. They make comparisons of the productivity between exporting and non-exporting producers. The aim of the research, among other things, is to show the differences in TFP between different companies. The authors of the article review the literature related to various methods of TFP measurement. They indicate the importance of the influence that different factors have on its measurement. This study refers to the research conducted by the authors.
The authors of the article try to prove the changes in TFP among agricultural enterprises from various industries in China, and try to answer the question of which factors lead to differences using statistical methods. The authors presented the obtained results in a descriptive, tabular and graphical manner.
Point 1:According to the Reviewer, the article lacks a broader review of TFP itself and software used, i.e. Stata 15.0.
Response 1: it introduces the connotation and the main functions of TFP, the section in the introduction; Stata15.0 is an econometric software, which is written by scholars to measure TFP (introduced in the footnotes).
Point 2:Section 2.2. (Data) could be discussed more broadly and explain why particular enterprises were included in the analyzed data while others were rejected.
Response 2: the main reasons for selecting specific enterprises or samples are explained, and the data description is added in Section 2.2, especially the exporting and non-exporting characteristics of various types of enterprises.
Point 3:In addition, an explanation of which branches of the agricultural industries were taken under consideration shall be added for clarification of further results. The selection of a sample of enterprises for research has a great impact on the analysis.
Response 3: this paper describes the classification of agricultural enterprises, especially in terms of the agricultural sectors, which is presented in the form of footnotes.
The article contains a wide range of literature. The study is interesting. The article is at a good level, but needs to be supplemented. I propose to admit it for publication after completion.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The motivation to undertake the research as well as the research method and its description are made very carefully.
In the item "Index selection and measurement", there is too little discussion with the results of other researchers on the same or similar subject. There are too few discussions with the literature aimed at explaining the results obtained.
A similar remark also applies to the point "Overall perspective comparison"
I suggest expanding the applications with broader suggestions for agencies deciding about the agricultural market - appropriately for each short application. As they are now, in my opinion they are too synthetic.
To sum up, very interesting research, carefully conducted analyzes, but too little reference to current literature reports.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Thank you very much for your suggestions. The author makes the following modifications and explanations according to your suggestions.
The motivation to undertake the research as well as the research method and its description are made very carefully.
Point 1:In the item "Index selection and measurement", there is too little discussion with the results of other researchers on the same or similar subject. There are too few discussions with the literature aimed at explaining the results obtained.
Response 1: In this part, the author added the corresponding literature research, for details, see the paper part. Adding the corresponding literature in "index selection and measurement", and the cited literature is more from the literature of Chinese scholars, which may be related to data selection; Different from other scholars, due to the short sample time sequence, this paper uses agricultural product price index to deflate the output indicators; In addition, some scholars use OP and LP methods to measure TFP, which needs to choose "intermediate proxy variable". This paper combines investment into assets, and does not consider investment as an independent variable.
Point 2:A similar remark also applies to the point "Overall perspective comparison"
I suggest expanding the applications with broader suggestions for agencies deciding about the agricultural market - appropriately for each short application. As they are now, in my opinion they are too synthetic.
Response 2: According to the empirical research conclusions, this paper expands the policy recommendations from the following three aspects: first, for all enterprises, improving the technical progress rate is the key; Second, from the perspective of enterprise types, we should pay attention to the development of private enterprises, especially increase the support of preferential policy; Third, enterprises with competitive advantages and high value-added agricultural products should be encouraged to export, so as to improve the competitiveness of China’s agricultural trade. For details, see policy recommendations.
To sum up, very interesting research, carefully conducted analyzes, but too little reference to current literature reports.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The objective of the article was to identify the reasons for the slowdown in productivity growth in agricultural production in China. The authors use the Total Malmquist Productivity Index (TFP). The productivity paradox suggested in the article has long been studied in the literature. Review article in this area points to a whole spectrum of causes that can trigger this effect [Spithoven, A. H. G. M. (2003). The productivity paradox and the business cycle. International Journal of Social Economics, 30(6), 679–699. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290310474094]. It has been suggested that the rate of productivity growth may accelerate with a new upturn of the business cycle.
The world-renowned researcher of this phenomenon in the U.S. (Erik Brynjolfsson-Understanding and Addressing the Modern Productivity Paradox) suggests that new technologies take time to diffuse, be implemented, and reach their full economic potential
(the scope of the research covered only two years 2016-2017). His recommendations include removing bottlenecks to entrepreneurship and business innovation. One should also pay attention to the publication in which the authors attempt to explain China Export - Productivity Paradox [Wang, P.-Z., Sun, L.-P., & Zhang, S.-Y. (2018). The Interpretations of China’s Exports-Productivity Paradox and Policy Implications. Proceedings of the 4th Annual International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Development (ICMESD 2018). 4th Annual International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Development (ICMESD 2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/icmesd-18.2018.148]. One of the ways they explain the phenomenon is that policies should be targeted at highly productive firms in order to encourage enterprise to export high-tech and high value-added products.
The authors limit their discussion of the research findings by not referring to the broader literature. It is also worth mentioning the research carried out under the MICROPROD project - it concerns European countries.
In one of his earlier articles [Jia, W; Wang, L.M; Mao, X.F; Qin, F. Is there an "export productivity paradox" in Chinese agricultural enterprises? Chinese 380Rural Economy.2018,03,45-60.], one of the author states that "segmentation has stimulated the export of agricultural enterprises with low productivity". Why did he choose only technical change as a TFP factor?
In addition, the article should be supplemented by pointing out: are there significant differences in the structure of agricultural enterprises in different regions of China (1); has the price of agricultural products changed during the period (2), what are the regulations related to the quality of agricultural products in the Chinese market and the largest importers - technical change in agriculture often encounters this kind of barriers (3).
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Thank you very much for your constructive comments. According to your suggestion, the author makes the following modifications and explanations.
The objective of the article was to identify the reasons for the slowdown in productivity growth in agricultural production in China. The authors use the Total Malmquist Productivity Index (TFP). The productivity paradox suggested in the article has long been studied in the literature.
Review article in this area points to a whole spectrum of causes that can trigger this effect [Spithoven, A. H. G. M. (2003). The productivity paradox and the business cycle. International Journal of Social Economics, 30(6), 679–699. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290310474094]. It has been suggested that the rate of productivity growth may accelerate with a new upturn of the business cycle. The world-renowned researcher of this phenomenon in the U.S. (Erik Brynjolfsson-Understanding and Addressing the Modern Productivity Paradox) suggests that new technologies take time to diffuse, be implemented, and reach their full economic potential (the scope of the research covered only two years 2016-2017). His recommendations include removing bottlenecks to entrepreneurship and business innovation. One should also pay attention to the publication in which the authors attempt to explain China Export - Productivity Paradox [Wang, P.-Z., Sun, L.-P., & Zhang, S.-Y. (2018). The Interpretations of China’s Exports-Productivity Paradox and Policy Implications. Proceedings of the 4th Annual International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Development (ICMESD 2018). 4th Annual International Conference on Management, Economics and Social Development (ICMESD 2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/icmesd-18.2018.148]. One of the ways they explain the phenomenon is that policies should be targeted at highly productive firms in order to encourage enterprise to export high-tech and high value-added products.
Point 1:The authors limit their discussion of the research findings by not referring to the broader literature. It is also worth mentioning the research carried out under the MICROPROD project - it concerns European countries.
Response 1: we read the two literatures recommended by you, and supplemented the relevant research literatures in the full text.
Point 2:In one of his earlier articles [Jia, W; Wang, L.M; Mao, X.F; Qin, F. Is there an "export productivity paradox" in Chinese agricultural enterprises? Chinese 380Rural Economy.2018,03,45-60.], one of the author states that "segmentation has stimulated the export of agricultural enterprises with low productivity". Why did he choose only technical change as a TFP factor?
Response 2: referring to relevant studies, TFP can be divided into the following changes: changes in technical efficiency, changes in technical progress, changes in scale efficiency and changes in distribution efficiency. Changes in scale efficiency and distribution efficiency need the price of "factors" in the measurement process, while in the monitoring process of leading enterprises, the price of capital and labor can be determined, but the price of raw materials can’t be determined. Agricultural enterprises face more raw material prices, and there are many kinds of price classification. Therefore, this paper only selects technical progress and technical efficiency as the important factors of TFP.
Point 3:In addition, the article should be supplemented by pointing out: are there significant differences in the structure of agricultural enterprises in different regions of China (1); has the price of agricultural products changed during the period (2), what are the regulations related to the quality of agricultural products in the Chinese market and the largest importers - technical change in agriculture often encounters this kind of barriers (3).
Response 3:
First, from 2016 to 2017 as a whole, the price of agricultural products changed little. Moreover, in the research process, we also removed the factor of the price change of agricultural products, which may be the inadequacy of this paper. This part is discussed in the conclusion.
Second, thank you very much for putting forward " what are the regulations related to the quality of agricultural products in the Chinese market and the largest importers", This question may also become an important direction of our future research, based on the perspective of agricultural products import of importing countries. The export of China's agricultural products encounters all kinds of technical barriers. And the technical barriers are more represented by technical standards (within the scope of science and technology) formulated by the national or regional government, such as product specifications, quality and technical indicators, which may be different from the technical progress of enterprises; I feel sorry about that we can't answer your question from a quantitative point of view at present, because our monitoring data on leading enterprises are not targeted at the exporting countries of agricultural enterprises. This may also be the inadequacy of our research, please bear with me on this.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
1) Must be clear aim of your article (in Introduction and in Summary); now it is not so easy to understand.
2) Need to be data about total export and non-export production from China; It would be good to know the "problem"? Is this good if the China has export or it better they work for inside market. Is the China more interested in export of agricultural production?
3) Not so intereresting "technological progress index of agricultural exporting enterprises is lower than that of agricultural non-exporting enterprises" (line 279/ p.8). And as well regional aspects not so important. It is internal planning aspects of the country. For export it is not important.
4) Conclusions must come from your counted data. You can improve it.
5) According your reccomendations. (lines 361-363 ) What kind of enterprises should support government (collective or private) or exporting or non-exporting? Now it is not clear.
6) Some proposals in the text of article.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 4 Comments
Thank you very much for your suggestions. The author makes the following modifications and explanations according to your suggestions.
Point 1: Must be clear aim of your article (in Introduction and in Summary); now it is not so easy to understand.
Response 1: It has been modified here. It is described in one sentence in the abstract. In addition, it describes the characteristics of agricultural trade in the first paragraph. From the theoretical level, export and productivity promote each other. However, there is an "export productivity paradox" in China's agricultural enterprises. The main purpose of this paper is to explain why there is a "paradox" in enterprises from the perspective of the components of TFP.
Point 2: Need to be data about total export and non-export production from China; It would be good to know the "problem"? Is this good if the China has export or it better they work for inside market. Is the China more interested in export of agricultural production?
Response 2: This paper uses the way of description to supplement the current situation of China's agricultural trade and the current situation of China's agricultural exporting enterprises. The data shows that the export of agricultural leading enterprises is an important part of China's agricultural export, accounting for about 20%. It also expounds that export has obvious contribution to economic growth, which is also an important reason why we choose the sample of agricultural leading enterprises.
Point 3:Not so interesting "technological progress index of agricultural exporting enterprises is lower than that of agricultural non-exporting enterprises" (line 279/ p.8). And as well regional aspects not so important. It is internal planning aspects of the country. For export it is not important.
Response 3: It is true that "the technical progress index of agricultural exporting enterprises is lower than that of agricultural non-exporting enterprises". It is more about the comparison between agricultural exporting enterprises and non-exporting enterprises, and it may not catch readers' interest. The author makes some modifications to this. The reason why the author chooses to compare from the regional aspect may have something to do with the export of agricultural products of various provinces in China. The eastern provinces are the important provinces of agricultural products export. The data shows that most of the top ten agricultural products export provinces in China are located in the eastern region. From the perspective of different provinces, it is more expressive to show the difference of TFP between regional exporting and non-exporting enterprises.
Point 4: Conclusions must come from your counted data. You can improve it.
Response 4: According to the empirical research results, the author reorganized this part, see the research conclusion.
Point 5:According your recommendations. (lines 361-363) What kind of enterprises should support government (collective or private) or exporting or non-exporting? Now it is not clear.
Response 5: The author puts forward three revised suggestions. First, from the overall point of view, we should pay attention to the technical progress of enterprises, increase the R&D investment of enterprises, and improve the technical progress rate of enterprises; Second, from the perspective of different types of enterprises, preferential policies should be adopted to support the development of private enterprises; Third, the government should encourage enterprises with competitive advantages and high value-added agricultural products to export, so as to enhance the competitiveness of China's agricultural trade.
Point 6: Some proposals in the text of article.
Response 6:In this part, It has been modified according to the proposals in the text of article , for details, see the paper part.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors took into account the suggested additions to the content of the article. In the discussion of the results, there was no reference to other regions of the world (except China). Such a supplementation ought to be in the following articles.
