Characteristics and Driving Forces of Non-Grain Production of Cultivated Land from the Perspective of Food Security
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors investigated the quantitative characteristics and spatial distribution of cultivated land used for non-grain purposes in Liyang, Jiangsu, China. They focused on the clustering characteristics and mechanisms behind this. They found that most cultivated lands in Liyang have not been used for non-grain purposes. They stated that there is no significant spatial correlation of cultivated land for non-grain purposes. It was also reported that the number of enterprises is the core factor that leads to the non-grain use of cultivated land in Liyang. The study is well-conducted and the methods used are appropriate. The data is presented clearly. These findings will be of interest to engineers and researchers in the field.
I have the following minor concerns.
1) P1L4 ', Canfeng' should be revised to ', and Canfeng.'
2) P1L15 'not much cultivated land in Liyang City has been' should be revised to, for example, 'most of the cultivated lands in Liyang City have not been.'
3) P1L18 'HH zone' should be revised to 'High-High (HH) zone.'
4) P1L19 'LH Zone' should be revised to 'Low-High (LH) zone.'
5) P1L40 '(Wu Sunchen, 2019)' should be deleted.
6) P2L69 [12, 17] should be revised to [12,17].
7) P2L80-88 Please clearly state the objective of this paper.
8) P3L99 Figure 1 A right-down figure is unclear and not necessary, which should be deleted. A caption of (a) and (b) is necessary. 'Figure 1 Location of Liyang.' should be revised to, for example, 'Figure 1 Location of Liyang. (a) Jiangsu Province, China; and (b) Liyang City.'
9) P3L112 '2' of '400m2' should be a superscript. A blank should be added between 400 and m.
10) P3L117 and L122 The number less than 10 should be spelled out. For example, '4 types' should be revised to 'four types.'
11) P4L147 There are some typographical errors. 'g' of 'Ng' and 'ng' of 'Sng' should be subscripts.
12) P4L154 'LISA' should be spelled out in full, for example, 'Local Indicator of Spatial Autocorrelation (LISA),' the first time it appears and abbreviated thereafter.
13) P4L156 Equation (2) 'n' should be located on the summation mark. 'i=1' and 'j=1' should be located below the summation mark.
14) P5L175 There is a typographical error. 'pad dy' should be revised to 'paddy'.
15) P5L184 'Table 1' in the title should be deleted. 'Title 2' in the table should be deleted.
16) P6L197 P7L219 P8L251 P9L262 P12L337 A blank should be added between 'Figure' and the number. For example, 'Figure2.' should be revised to 'Figure 2.'. All the figure titles should be centered.
17) P7L215 '9,352.08 (48.10%) hectares' should be revised to '9,352.08 hectares (48.10%)'.
18) P8L251 The figure label should be added. The town names should be described near the marks.
19) P8LL254 The explanation of 'HH' and 'LH' should be described. For example, 'The map of the spatial patterns is classified into some categories. HH means the positive spatial autocorrelation. LH shows the negative spatial autocorrelation.'
21) P10L297 The location of 'Table 2. Correlation result.' should be centered.
22) P10L317 'AICc' should be spelled out in full the first time it appears and abbreviated thereafter. For example, 'Akaike information criterion with a correlation for small sample sizes (AICc)' should be described.
23) P11L330 'Table 2' should be revised to 'Table 3.' The location of the table title should be centered.
24) P12L337 '(a) Budget expenditure; (b) Urbanization rate; (c) Added value of the secondary industry; (d) Number of industrial enterprises; (e) Per capita grain acreage; and (f) Proportion of the fishing industry in the primary industry.' should be added to the figure title.
25) P12L338 L343 L347 L352 L358 P13L362 A hyphen in figure number should be deleted. For example, 'Figure 6-a' should be revised to 'Figure 6a'.
26) P14L454 There is a typographical error. 'non-grain production rate of cultivated land' should be deleted.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article deals with non-grain production in Liyang City, Jiangsu Province in China. I appreciate the laboriousness of the analyses, the use of interesting research methods. However, in its present form, the study is more like a report than a scientific paper. To a certain extent, the recommendations included may be helpful to the authority. However, it is difficult to find references for economic theory. The topic is focused on completely intra-China. To make it attractive to non-Chinese readers, it would be added in some contexts an international comparison that not only mirrors but also evaluates the country in a comparative sense. The theme of sustainability is also under-exposed.
Non-grain production has a very wide scope and may concern food production, e.g. fruit, vegetables, rape, but also non-food products (medicinal) or bioenergy production. The authors do not notice this at all and treat all these cases equally. There are significant differences in the impact on food security depending on how non-grain production is structured. Furthermore, if the profitability of grain production is falling, it is not surprising that agricultural producers are moving to more profitable production. If, on the other hand, this were a massive phenomenon, then, theoretically, a low supply of grain production would result in a significant increase in prices and profitability. The authors should take these issues into account, including in the context of proposing institutional solutions in this area at the government or local level.
I have doubts about the use of the terms 'characteristics' and 'mechanism' in the title. In the first case, it results from too report-like connotations (a similar remark applies to the title of section 3.1.1), while in the case of the latter, there is a lack of consideration of dynamics in evaluations (multi-year analyses), or in-depth studies at the microeconomic level.
"The grain subsidy policies [18] and the focus of local governments in economic development [19] affect the non-grain production of cultivated land as well" (69-71). This needs to be clarified as the sentence mentions that there are grain subsidy policies.
"The findings shed light on how to protect the cultivated land and enhance food security" (87-88). I do not understand what land protection is involved here? The problem may arise if the land is taken out of agricultural production in favour of industrial development, infrastructure, abandonment of agricultural production when this would affect food security. The situation is different with non-grain production, which also plays an important role, not only in terms of food security.
"Some of the lands are used to grow cash crops". (105-106). After all, cereals also belong to cash crops because they can be sold. Therefore the use of the term cash crops is misleading.
The titles of the tables are not quite precise. They should answer the question: what, where, when?
Non-grain production accounts for only 9.7% of the total in Liyang. So why is this so heavily publicised by the Authors as being a problem, especially as non-grain production is also needed for food security?
How is the variable "Average altitude" defined (Table 2)?
The authors have not addressed what the correlation analyses (tab.2) show, what effects this has, etc.
Incomprehensible is the statement "When the AICc value difference between the GWR model and the OLS model is greater than 3, the fitting result of the GWR model is better". It is standard to assume a lower value of the AIC or a higher R2 for selecting the correct model. This should be clarified or literature in this area should be referred.
The captions of figure 6 are shifted, especially a,b,c.
"As shown in Figure 6-a, budget expenditure has a negative impact on the non-grain production of cultivated land". How it should be understood when Table 2 shows that the correlation for budget expenditure is positive and reaches a high value?
Table 2 appears twice (numbering error)
The authors indicate that the high correlation between the budget expenditure and the non-grain production of cultivated land in Daibu Town means that most of the town budget is spent on agriculture and that the local government offers strong support to grain growing. It would simply be necessary to check this and verify how much of the budget is spent on this. It is not known what the structure of budget expenditure is and the correlation may be coincidental.
"Most of the towns with high regression coefficients are located in southeastern Liyang, which suggests that the development of the secondary and tertiary industries requires much cultivated land" (345-347). This is an oversimplification resulting from an overly technical approach to the analysis of the results
“The rapid development of the secondary and tertiary sectors has attracted many rural laborers away, which leads to a continuous decline in the rural labor force engaged in grain growing and the change in the agricultural structure" (404-406). The authors should note that such development processes are universal in the world. Among other things, it leads to an increase in agricultural productivity and causes the substitution of labour factor by capital, as well as an increase in demand for innovation.
There are too few syntheses and scientific references in the Conclusions section. The first paragraph (433-436) is, in my opinion, unnecessary.
In the Conclusions section, the theme of the GDP suddenly appears, which has never been analysed before.
Overall, my assessment of the article is negative. The research problem, its performance and theoretical background are not adequate to the rank of the journal "Sustainability".
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Much cultivated land in China has been used for non-grain production purposes to food insecurity aggravates worldwide. This article reveals that the cultivated land in Liyang Cityis abundant but has been used for non-grain purposes, which is related to the number of enterprises. These results are of great theoretical significance and practical value for grain production. The analysis process is comprehensive, good organized, large amount of information and so on. Minor revision can be published in Sustainability. However, there are some major issues need to be improved:
- Abstract:The mechanism of cultivated land non-grain cultivation is not clear, especially the key lies in the low food prices?
- Introduction: Whether the government should give support to the grain production and scientific research governments with low economic benefits, and the crops with high economic benefits should be borne by the enterprises.Has this view been reported by research?
- Materials and Methods: Please supplement food crop and non-food crop types;Barley grains and their seedling powder to prevent and control more than 20 human chronic diseases(https://www.hindawi.com/journals/omcl/2020/3836172/), and strong salt resistance, is there planting?
- Results: The Table 1and Title 2 image is deleted in Table 1; There should be spaces in Figure 1 to Figure 6?
- Discussions: The contribution of low grain prices to the expansion of non-grain productionshould be supplemented in the discussion;
- Conclusions: Note how to delete the extra text.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
The paper is clear and well written. I just suggest to explain (in few words) why did you chose the Moran scatter plot methodology among others (which is the asset of this methodology?) and also to briefly review which methodologies have been used in literature for the same purposes.
In the conclusion paragraph there is an incomplete sentence: "non-grain production rate of cultivated land"
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I appreciate the authors' detailed response to my comments, interesting research, and advanced research methodology. I am also impressed by the high personal culture and sincerity evident in the author's response. The article has a higher scientific level than before. While some of the arguments in the author's response convinced me, I am still not satisfied with some of the explanations because they were implemented somewhat superficially and perhaps this was due to a misunderstanding of my intentions.
I refer to:
- the issue of the title of the article, its inadequacy and wording that does not fit in scientific standards
- the still excessive reporting inclination of the article. However, I would like to note that the article has considerable application values and may be useful for shaping agricultural policy in China
-the insufficiently highlighted problem of food security in the context of grain and non-grain production
- lack of an international context for the research and probably little interest from non-Chinese readers. This can also be seen in the literature, where there is a clear dominance of positions by Chinese authors
- perhaps the term 'cash crops' is misleading when translated into English
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2
Comment 1: I appreciate the authors' detailed response to my comments, interesting research, and advanced research methodology. I am also impressed by the high personal culture and sincerity evident in the author's response. The article has a higher scientific level than before. While some of the arguments in the author's response convinced me, I am still not satisfied with some of the explanations because they were implemented somewhat superficially and perhaps this was due to a misunderstanding of my intentions.
Response 1: Thank you very much for your approve of the revision. We believe that with your suggestion, after this modification, this paper will be better improved. Maybe we can't accurately understand your original intention for some problems. We will try our best to understand your suggestions and actively modify and improve these problems.
Comment 2: The issue of the title of the article, its inadequacy and wording that does not fit in scientific standards.
Response 2: Thank you very much for pointing out the problem of the title of the paper, which shows your pursuit of preciseness and scientificity. We have increased the analysis of the mechanism, but the increased part only summarizes the reasons behind the non-grain production of cultivated land in Liyang City, which may not be applicable to other regions. We decided to modify the title as "Characteristics and Driving Forces of Non-grain Production of Cultivated Land from the Perspective of Food Security" according to your suggestions.
Comment 3: The still excessive reporting inclination of the article. However, I would like to note that the article has considerable application values and may be useful for shaping agricultural policy in China.
Response 3: Thank you very much for pointing out this problem. The article you pointed out tends to be in the form of report. We think this may be due to the extensive description of the characteristics of cultivated land non grain in Chapter 3.1. In order to make foreign readers better understand the problems faced by China's cultivated land resources, this study makes a detailed introduction to the characteristics of non-grain production of cultivated land. In terms of language use, strive to make the narration concise and easy to understand. Through your careful guidance, this paper has increased the research depth and improved the scientificity of the article.
Comment 4: The insufficiently highlighted problem of food security in the context of grain and non-grain production.
Response 4: Thank you very much for your questions. In the original manuscript, we explained that the reduction of the amount of cultivated land used for grain cultivation will lead to the decline of grain output. The original paper lacks the analysis of the impact of non-grain production of cultivated land on food security. Therefore, we add this part to the Introduction Section and Discussion Section, and emphasize the harm of cultivated land non grain to sustainable development.
The corresponding revision was given in the revised manuscript in P26L68-78: Cultivated land is the most important natural resource base for grain production and plays the most fundamental constraint role on the effective supply capacity of grain. The decline of cultivated land used for grain planting will lead to the decline of total grain output. The direct impact of non-grain production of cultivated land is the problem of food security. To some extent, non-grain production of cultivated land can be under-stood as a new form of cultivated land loss. Therefore, the essence of non-grain pro-duction of cultivated land is the protection of cultivated land quality and quantity. However, the non-grain production of cultivated land will damage the production ca-pacity of cultivated land, including the damage of soil tillage layer, greenhouse gas emission and aggravating agricultural non-point source pollution. If it is not controlled in time, it will threaten the national food security.
The corresponding revision was given in the revised manuscript in P19L561-571: Although the amount of cultivated land used for grain production is decreasing, the grain output shows an upward trend year after year, which is due to the progress of agricultural science and technology and the increase of grain per unit area yield, which covers up the severe fact that the quality of cultivated land decreases due to non-grain production of cultivated land. In the face of increasingly serious resource and environmental problems, if we neglect the control of cultivated land use, it will lead to food security problems, and then affect the social and economic development. The future development of agriculture should take the sustainable utilization of cultivated land resources and the improvement of ecological environment as the premise, strictly control the use of cultivated land on the basis of ensuring food security, and make every effort to build a new pattern of sustainable development of cultivated land.
Comment 5: Lack of an international context for the research and probably little interest from non-Chinese readers. This can also be seen in the literature, where there is a clear dominance of positions by Chinese authors.
Response 5: Thank you very much for mentioning this issue again. We have been focusing on this research and will make more contribution on it. We are sorry that due to the network environment and other reasons, it is difficult for us to obtain cases that can be effectively compared. Secondly, the confidentiality level of land use data in various countries has always been high, so it is difficult for us to use the land data used in this paper to analyze the non-grain production characteristics of other countries. The reason why we have the land data of Liyang City is that we have been supported by the research fund and allowed to publish relevant data. Third, because the topic of non-grain production of cultivated land has been studied more in China in recent years, we also hope to attract more international scholars to join in the attention and joint research on this issue, especially its application in China. While querying foreign cases, it further deepened our understanding of non-grain production of cultivated land, and laid a solid foundation for future research.
For example, we use "non-grain production of cultivated land " as the keyword to search in Google academic, and the search results in Chinese take China as the research object, with references: (1) Su, Yue, et al. "Identifying the driving forces of non-grain production expansion in rural China and its implications for policies on cultivated land protection." Land Use Policy 92 (2020): 104435. (2) Su, Yue, et al. "Quantifying the spatiotemporal dynamics and multi-aspect performance of non-grain production during 2000–2015 at a fine scale." Ecological Indicators 101 (2019): 410-419. (3) Sun, Yan, et al. "Spatial Differentiation of Non-Grain Production on Cultivated Land and Its Driving Factors in Coastal China." Sustainability 13.23 (2021): 13064. (4) Sun, Yan, et al. "Spatial Differentiation of Non-Grain Production on Cultivated Land and Its Driving Factors in Coastal China." Sustainability 13.23 (2021): 13064. We agree with you that it is of great significance to increase the comparison of cases in other countries, but due to the availability of data, we will continue to pay attention to the relevant information of non-grain production of cultivated land in other countries and further deepen the research on the theme of non-grain production of cultivated land through case comparative analysis in future research.
In order to attract the attention of scholars from other countries to this issue, we have added the following contents in P1l39-44: In recent years, although the national treasury of global food production has increased significantly, which has a certain inhibitory effect on the rise of food prices, it is still not enough to provide absolute security. The COVID-19 pandemic indirectly triggered the problem of food security and exacerbated the hunger situation in some countries. 25 countries around the world are at serious risk of hunger, and the number of people who are food insecure has increased to 270 million. Present study is mainly based on the non-grain production of cultivated land in China，because of the number of global hunger and the huge number of countries, we hope that more international scholars pay attention to this issue which has major effect on the global food supply.
Comment 6: Perhaps the term 'cash crops' is misleading when translated into English.
Response 6: Thank you very much for your reminder. Considering that the readers of this article are not limited to China, in order to avoid foreign readers will have the same questions as you, we will choose a more appropriate expression. We have changed all "cash crops" in the manuscript to "non-grain crops".
(You can also see the attachment)
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors.
Despite the very polite narrative contained in the review response, the changes are rather minor. On the other hand, I would understand the situation if the Authors convinced me by their arguments as to why they disagreed with me and therefore did not make the proposed changes. Using the term "characteristics" in the title of an article lowers the status of a scientific paper. Scientists primarily deal with problems that are derived from an in-depth, but not fully explored, real-world situation. Meanwhile, the mere description (characteristic) of this reality is only the first stage of cognition, which refers to reports or preliminary cognition, but without scientific background or links to scientific theories. I have nothing against research at the regional level, but this article still lacks comparability with research results from other regions of the world. Consequently, the studied issues are isolated from the global research flow. After all, these issues are also indirectly related to food security issues in other Asian countries as well. It would also be interesting to see references to countries in Africa or South America where in many situations there is e.g. substitution of food production for bioenergy production. It is a pity that the authors do not notice this, especially as the study contains many very interesting analyses and conclusions. Consequently, the narrative is that the problems of non-grain production in the studied region are the most important in Chinese agriculture. There is also a lack of identification of the impact of reduced non-grain production on other food markets. Therefore, my final conclusion is the same as before: In light of the above, my assessment of this article swings between acceptance and rejection.
