Traditional Subsistence Farming of Smallholder Agroforestry Systems in Indonesia: A Review
, Sanudin 2, Mohamad Siarudin 3,4,*, Ary Widiyanto 2,*, Dian Diniyati 1, Aris Sudomo 5, Aditya Hani 3,5, Eva Fauziyah 2,3, Endah Suhaendah 5, Tri Sulistyati Widyaningsih 6,7, Wuri Handayani 4, Dewi Maharani 5, Suhartono 3,4, Maria Palmolina 8, Dila Swestiani 5, Harry Budi Santoso Sulistiadi 5, Aji Winara 9, Yudha Hadian Nur 9, Muthya Diana 9, Dewi Gartika 9 and add
Show full author list
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments by line:
49-98: it would be beneficial to also discuss the issue of soil tillage and no-till systems like Conservation Agriculture in this context and not only distinguish agroforestry and “conventional” farming. Particularly for larger operations trees in the field are not compatible with tillage, while Conservation Agriculture systems facilitate the integration of trees in the field. Also for smaller scale and subsistence farmers the mentioned benefits of agroforestry do not fully work, if the farmers apply soil tillage on their cropping areas. This should be reflected in the introduction, as it could be one reason, why agroforestry is not popular, as so far tillage based agriculture is still the most common form of crop production. The integration of Conservation Agriculture in conventional agroforestry practices has been promoted, for example, by ICRAF under the term Evergreen Agriculture or Conservation Agriculture (CA) with trees. Such keywords might have enriched the literature search.
183-187: those benefits result not so much from the trees, but from less soil tillage and are similar to CA cropping even without any trees. This could be mentioned.
273: pls. change the term “quality” to education level. A low education level does not really justify the use of the term “quality” to describe human resources. The low education level is probably not the result of lower intelligence or intrinsic capacity, but of opportunities to receive education.
481: missing space between “related” and “to”
531-533: correct sentence: subject “smallholder farmers” do not fit to the last part “… and are only carried out by families”.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your expert assessments and valuable comments.
Please see the attachment for our responses.
Best regards,
Authors
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript entitled “Traditional Subsistence Farming of Smallholder Agroforestry Systems in Indonesia: A Review” (sustainability-1793672) was aimed at identifying the characteristics and factors causing the occurrence of agricultural subsistence and analyzing its implications for the level of Indonesian farmers’ welfare and the regional forestry industry.
The review is well-written and well-organized. However, in order to improve the quality of the manuscript, I propose the following:
- The first section (Introduction) is too short and it is not well-connected with the following section (Methods). Thus, I suggest: (a) further expanding this section with more background on the agroforestry in Indonesia, especially from a socio-economic and environmental perspective, while highlighting the subsistence farming implications at microeconomic and macroeconomic levels; (b) tapping deeper into current gaps identified in the literature on the analyzed topic; and (c) highlighting even more the novelty factor of this review and further developing on how it complements the literature at various levels. Additionally, at the end of the Introduction section, I propose elaborating a paragraph dedicated to explaining the structure of this review, as well as a sentence dedicated to smoothening the transition from the Introduction section to the Methods section.
- Regarding the method, the last stage of the literature selection needs more explanation. How was the "reviewing" carried out? Based on what criteria were the 123 publications considered and included in this review?
- The discussions are more than sufficient, but the conclusions need more attention. I suggest elaborating few more paragraphs on: (a) managerial implications based on the review findings; (b) explaining if there are limitations regarding this review; (c) mention possible future research avenues for other scholars to pick up based on where this review left off.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for your expert assessments and valuable comments.
Please see the attachment for our responses.
Best regards,
Authors
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
