Farmers’ Livelihood Capital and Its Impact on Sustainable Livelihood Strategies: Evidence from the Poverty-Stricken Areas of Southwest China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I appreciate the paper as very interesting, methodologically structured and argued, but it needs improvements in English (grammar, style,etc.) writing and in the concepts used.

I also find the paper very important because it addresses the issue of livelihood strategies in relation to livelihood capital, applying an empirical analizyse in an area under the stigma of poverty.
I do not insist on the need to revise the English language because I hope that they will use professional facilities, maybe even those offered by the publishing house.
I make punctual references on the text.
Line 25.  For the syntagma "non-agriculture" may be useful a better explanation of the desired meaning and the correlation with the three categories used later in the paper: “agricultural”, “part- agricultural”and “non-agricultural”.
Line 45. It is neccesary a brief description of the concept of the "three rural" work and the issues it alevates, issues that are mentioned below in the paper, also without bringing a full explanation on them.
Lines 143 - 154 show the character of uniqueness, differentiation from the rest of the literature studies, and I appreciated. But the author’s must respected by the end this promise for the readers.
Line 164 "Material and Methods" must correct in "Materials and Methods"
In point 2.2. The "Index System Construction" would be useful the argument the choice of indicators included in the authors' model for each of the five capital categories. Also, a correlation of these criteria with the research objectives.
In point 2.3. I suggest pointing out some empirical data and some appreciations of the authors who support the attribute of "poor zone" for Sichuan. In this way it is justifies the purpose of the work and the character of originality, offering differentiation from the rest of the specialized literature.
In point 2.4. For a better understanding of the information obtained, especially those of a qualitative nature regarding livelihood strategies, examples of questions that were part of the interview / questionnaire would be necessary to  provide. The questionnaire could be attached to the paper (Annex no 1), but it is up to the authors.
Point 2.5.1. is unsatisfactory because it does not clarify: the choice of indicators, the data obtained in Table 3, and it does not provide the result of the formulas applied for the chosen data set.
If the above mentioned regarding the choice of indicators and the application of the formulas were clearer, it would be easier to objectively evaluate point 3, which seems strictly correct as an exercise of applying the statistical method.
Point 4 emphasizes again the method of entropy, but from my point of view it is unclear its application in the paper for this area and the way in which it supports the authors' conclusions.
At point 5 For conclusions, the logistic function provided support, but I have the same observations regarding the ambiguity of the exposition regarding the use of the entropy method.
 In point 6, I appreciate the suggestions offered, especially from the perspective of public policies and the necessary government support / investment.
Maybe even the field of public policy could be impacted by such research, so congratulations to the authors!
I also wish them success in everything they do!

Author Response

Point 1: I appreciate the paper as very interesting, methodologically structured and argued, but it needs improvements in English (grammar, style,etc.) writing and in the concepts used.

Response 1: Thank you very much for taking the time to read this paper. We have used the English editing service to revise English grammar and other writing problems.

Point 2: I also find the paper very important because it addresses the issue of livelihood strategies in relation to livelihood capital, applying an empirical analizyse in an area under the stigma of poverty.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your affirmation. I hope to have the opportunity to learn and communicate with you a lot, and I hope that I can continue to make progress.

Point 3: Line 25.  For the syntagma "non-agriculture" may be useful a better explanation of the desired meaning and the correlation with the three categories used later in the paper: “agricultural”, “part- agricultural”and “non-agricultural”.

Response 3: Thank you very much. This paper divides farmers into three types, mainly to analyze the impact of livelihood capital on farmers with different types of livelihood strategies. And explore the key factors affecting the transformation of livelihood strategies. It is hoped that this study will help consolidate the achievements of poverty reduction, enrich the practice of poverty reduction and realize the sustainable development of farmers.

Point 4: Line 45. It is neccesary a brief description of the concept of the "three rural" work and the issues it alevates, issues that are mentioned below in the paper, also without bringing a full explanation on them.

Response 4: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. In the revised manuscript, this article has explained the concept of " three rural " and the issues it involves. “Three rural” refers to agriculture, rural areas and farmers. China is a large agricultural country. Agriculture is the primary industry. The countryside is a place where workers engaged in agricultural production live together. Farmers are people engaged in agricultural production for a long time. The “three rural” issue is also an important issue related to China's development. The so-called “three rural issues” refers to the three issues of agriculture, rural areas and farmers. The purpose of studying the three rural issues is to solve farmers' income increase, agricultural development and rural stability.

Point 5: Lines 143 - 154 show the character of uniqueness, differentiation from the rest of the literature studies, and I appreciated. But the author’s must respected by the end this promise for the readers.

Response 5: Thank you very much for your comments. We will respect our commitment to readers and continue to work hard.

Point 6: Line 164 "Material and Methods" must correct in "Materials and Methods"

Response 6: Thank you very much. This article has been revised.

Point 7: In point 2.2. The "Index System Construction" would be useful the argument the choice of indicators included in the authors' model for each of the five capital categories. Also, a correlation of these criteria with the research objectives.

In point 2.3. I suggest pointing out some empirical data and some appreciations of the authors who support the attribute of "poor zone" for Sichuan. In this way it is justifies the purpose of the work and the character of originality, offering differentiation from the rest of the specialized literature.

Response 7: Thank you for your valuable suggestions, which have been supplemented and improved in this revised manuscript. Sichuan Province covers a total area of 486000 square kilometers, accounting for 5.06% of the national area; The permanent resident population is 83.67 million, accounting for 5.92% of the national population.  

Point 8: In point 2.4. For a better understanding of the information obtained, especially those of a qualitative nature regarding livelihood strategies, examples of questions that were part of the interview / questionnaire would be necessary to provide. The questionnaire could be attached to the paper (Annex no 1), but it is up to the authors.

Response 8: Thank you for your suggestion. If the paper is lucky enough to be published, I hope that interested readers can contact me, and I will be happy to share my questionnaire and relevant research data.

Point 9: Point 2.5.1. is unsatisfactory because it does not clarify: the choice of indicators, the data obtained in Table 3, and it does not provide the result of the formulas applied for the chosen data set.

If the above mentioned regarding the choice of indicators and the application of the formulas were clearer, it would be easier to objectively evaluate point 3, which seems strictly correct as an exercise of applying the statistical method.

Response 9: Thank you very much. I'm sorry I didn't explain it clearly. This part mainly introduces the calculation method of livelihood capital. This paper adopts the entropy method. Since the indicators needed to measure livelihood capital have been detailed in point 2.2, the selection of indicators is not repeated in point 2.5.1. The calculation formula involved in the entropy method is mainly calculated by SPSSAU software. The calculation results are shown in Table 4. The data in Table 3 comes from the farmers' questionnaires, which are compiled by the author. If there is anything unclear in the explanation, please give me more guidance, thank you very much.

Point 10: Point 4 emphasizes again the method of entropy, but from my point of view it is unclear its application in the paper for this area and the way in which it supports the authors' conclusions.

At point 5 For conclusions, the logistic function provided support, but I have the same observations regarding the ambiguity of the exposition regarding the use of the entropy method.

Response 10: Thank you for your feedback. I'm sorry to make you confused. In this paper, the entropy method is used in the quantitative calculation and evaluation of farmers' livelihood capital level. There are many methods to evaluate the index system, and the entropy method is only one of them. The reason why this paper adopts entropy method is mainly because it is an objective weighting method, which can avoid the influence of some subjective factors that may be affected in the process of determining the index weight. Therefore, this paper adopts the entropy method to measure and evaluate the livelihood capital. If there is anything unclear, please give more criticism and guidance.

Point 11: In point 6, I appreciate the suggestions offered, especially from the perspective of public policies and the necessary government support / investment.

Maybe even the field of public policy could be impacted by such research, so congratulations to the authors!

I also wish them success in everything they do!

Response 11: Thank you for the in-depth review and comments that have greatly improved this paper. I will continue to explore this field in depth and hope to learn and communicate with you more. Thanks again！

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper address interesting topic.

But i think relevance of Sustainability need to be enrich.

The introduced is not linked with results and discussion.

In addition the conclusion are not properly linked with the discussion and discuss same output which already discussed.

Need to add new findings in the conclusion.

The English language need extensive editing.

In addition the novelty of the paper need to be ensured. What is the novelty of your paper? 

The objectives are not clear as well. 

Author Response

Point 1: The paper address interesting topic.

But i think relevance of Sustainability need to be enrich.

The introduced is not linked with results and discussion.

Response 1: Thank you very much for your advice. I have made some modifications to the relevant research content in this article. But I'm sorry because I didn't fully understand what you meant, so some places may not have been revised. Please give me more criticism and guidance. Hope to get your more specific and valuable suggestions for modification, thank you very much!

Point 2: In addition the conclusion are not properly linked with the discussion and discuss same output which already discussed.

Need to add new findings in the conclusion.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your suggestion. I have added new findings to the conclusion and supplemented and improved the conclusion.

Point 3: The English language need extensive editing.

Response 3: Thank you very much for taking the time to read this paper. We have used the English editing service to revise English grammar and other writing problems.

Point 4: In addition the novelty of the paper need to be ensured. What is the novelty of your paper? 

Response 4: Thank you for your advice. The possible innovations of this paper are as follows: ①This paper mainly adopts the more objective entropy method to quantitatively calculate the livelihood capital. Most of the research on livelihood capital is based on qualitative research, and there are not many quantitative evaluation of farmers' livelihood capital level. And even if there is quantitative research, the evaluation methods adopted mainly include analytic hierarchy process, principal component analysis and so on. Among them, the analytic hierarchy process has a certain subjectivity, and the results are not scientific and effective. The principal component analysis method can only reflect part of the original data, but can not cover all the data. The analysis results are not comprehensive enough, and the entropy method just makes up for the defects of the above methods. ②This paper focuses on the empirical study of the impact of livelihood capital on livelihood strategies, and analyzes the key influencing factors of the transformation of livelihood strategies in detail. Most studies on livelihood strategies are from the perspective of sociology, mainly focusing on the current situation of livelihood and the types of livelihood strategies, and lack of in-depth empirical research. Although some scholars have done some research on the impact of livelihood capital on livelihood strategies, the research is not comprehensive and thorough. They only analyze the impact of livelihood capital on the choice of livelihood strategies, and do not further analyze the impact of livelihood capital on the transformation of livelihood strategies. This paper makes up for this deficiency. ③As for the selection of research objects, most scholars mainly take a province, a city or even a county as the research area, and there is little research on poor farmers. This paper mainly takes farmers in poor areas as the research object, and southwest China is an area with a large number of poor people and a high incidence of poverty, and it is also the main area in the decisive period of poverty alleviation. Therefore, taking the poverty-stricken areas in Southwest China as the sample area is very representative and typical.

Point 5: The objectives are not clear as well. 

Response 5: Thank you for your feedback. I'm sorry that the research objectives were not clearly expressed. The research objectives of this paper mainly include: ① Quantitatively measure and evaluate the livelihood capital level of farmers in poor areas of Southwest China. ② Empirical research on the impact of livelihood capital on different types of livelihood strategies. ③ Explore the key factors to promote the transformation of livelihood strategy types.

Reviewer 3 Report

The research selected very important topic to investigate farmers’ livelihood capital and its impact on sustainable livelihood strategies in different counties of three provinces in China. However, there are several shortcomings that require revision before considering it to be published. 

1. The big and main issue in this paper is "writing arguments without proof". Throughout this paper, arguments were made, but no proof was given, or no explanations were given. Thus, as a reader from outside China, it would be difficult to understand the context, especially when there is no proof (i.e. citations) or no explanation. For example, first three paragraphs of the paper provide only one citation, however many arguments were made. Sustainable Livelihood Theory was explained in section 2, however only one citation was given, despite of the fact that there was much discussion on the Sustainable Livelihood Theory from past to present. 
   
   I quote few examples here, 
   p2, line 44-46,  ...the main focus 44 of the “three rural” work is fully promoted....   what is three rural, is it a policy, plan, or region? and citation ?
   p2, line 60, ..Compared with the central and eastern regions, the economic development of Western China is relatively slow....   (citation to prove this)
   p4, line 186, The Department for International Development (DFID) proposed a sustainable live-........ (citation/reference of DFID's proposal? is the figure 1 drawn by authors from the data of DFID, of authors used figure drawn by DFID? ) 
   
   Above, I mentioned only three examples, however, similar arguments have been made in almost all parts of the paper, but no citations/references/notes were given. Extensive revision is requires to explain and provide citations/proofs. 
2. Second issue with the paper is language. There are many grammatical errors, and word choice is not appropriate at some points. Thus, language editing is requires by the native english speaker who is expert in academic writing. 
3. Third issue is the presentation of methods, especially study areas. At one point (p8, line 315), the research claims that ......"and a total of more than 20 in-depth interview records were assembled"..... . however, these outcome of these interviews were not presented in the results sections. Also, the analysis framework was not given in the methods, that what methods/theories did authors use to analyse the questions, and what was the rational to use qualitative methods. 
   Did authors use some specific software to analyse the data, or how did authors collect the survey data (Chinese or in other local languages), how did the collected data converted into results (some software, by hand, or other methods). 
   Further, the study areas are explained well, but the explanations of all regions is not balanced, for example, % of total population and land was given for Yunnan and Guizhou, but missing for Sichuan. Further, what are the levels of poverty and other indicators in these regions, compared to the other regions of China.
   Notes on the ethical approval is missing, whether it was approved by specific ethics committee? 
4. Some minor issues that authors may consider to revise. 1. table 2 is confusing, there are better ways to present data in table, such as columns and sub-columns, . 2. table footnotes in the tables, to explain the abbreviations used in table (for example, table 5, table 6). 

Author Response

Point 1: The big and main issue in this paper is "writing arguments without proof". Throughout this paper, arguments were made, but no proof was given, or no explanations were given. Thus, as a reader from outside China, it would be difficult to understand the context, especially when there is no proof (i.e. citations) or no explanation. For example, first three paragraphs of the paper provide only one citation, however many arguments were made. Sustainable Livelihood Theory was explained in section 2, however only one citation was given, despite of the fact that there was much discussion on the Sustainable Livelihood Theory from past to present. 
I quote few examples here, 
p2, line 44-46,  ...the main focus 44 of the “three rural” work is fully promoted....   what is three rural, is it a policy, plan, or region? and citation ?
p2, line 60, ..Compared with the central and eastern regions, the economic development of Western China is relatively slow....   (citation to prove this)

p4, line 186, The Department for International Development (DFID) proposed a sustainable live-........ (citation/reference of DFID's proposal? is the figure 1 drawn by authors from the data of DFID, of authors used figure drawn by DFID? ) 
Above, I mentioned only three examples, however, similar arguments have been made in almost all parts of the paper, but no citations/references/notes were given. Extensive revision is requires to explain and provide citations/proofs. 

Response 1: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. I'm sorry for the lack of citation and explanation of some arguments in the thesis writing. In the revised manuscript, I have added references or explanations for several examples you mentioned and other places in the paper that need to be revised. If there is anything unclear in the explanation, please give more criticism and guidance. Thanks again!

Point 2: Second issue with the paper is language. There are many grammatical errors, and word choice is not appropriate at some points. Thus, language editing is requires by the native english speaker who is expert in academic writing. 

Response 2: Thank you very much for taking the time to read this paper. Thank you for your suggestion. We have used the English editing service to revise English grammar and other writing problems.

Point 3: Third issue is the presentation of methods, especially study areas. At one point (p8, line 315), the research claims that ......"and a total of more than 20 in-depth interview records were assembled"..... . however, these outcome of these interviews were not presented in the results sections. Also, the analysis framework was not given in the methods, that what methods/theories did authors use to analyse the questions, and what was the rational to use qualitative methods. 
Did authors use some specific software to analyse the data, or how did authors collect the survey data (Chinese or in other local languages), how did the collected data converted into results (some software, by hand, or other methods). 
Further, the study areas are explained well, but the explanations of all regions is not balanced, for example, % of total population and land was given for Yunnan and Guizhou, but missing for Sichuan. Further, what are the levels of poverty and other indicators in these regions, compared to the other regions of China.

Notes on the ethical approval is missing, whether it was approved by specific ethics committee? 

Response 3: Thank you for your valuable suggestions. The 20 in-depth interview records compiled in this paper mainly include detailed introduction of each case site, interviews and exchanges with village cadres and farmers, and other materials related to this research. With these materials, the author can have a deeper understanding of some conditions of farmers' livelihood, which is convenient for the smooth writing of the paper. Because there are too many materials, the interview record does not appear in the result part. The content of the results part is mainly calculated from the questionnaire data.

In this paper, the entropy method and the Logistic regression model are mainly used, and SPSSAU and STATA software are mainly used to analyze the data. This paper collects data through field research and filling in the questionnaire, and uses software to sort out and analyze the data, and finally obtains the research results of this paper.

In the revised manuscript, this paper has added the population and area of Sichuan Province. It also supplements and explains the poverty level in Southwest China.

This article has been approved by the ethics committee of Henan Normal University, and the approval letter has been sent to the editor.

Point 4: Some minor issues that authors may consider to revise. 1. table 2 is confusing, there are better ways to present data in table, such as columns and sub-columns, . 2. table footnotes in the tables, to explain the abbreviations used in table (for example, table 5, table 6). 

Response 4: Thank you for your valuable suggestions. In the revised manuscript, the format of Table 2 has been modified. Footnotes have been added to the abbreviations in Tables 5 and 6.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comment 1: The English text is very difficult to follow. It requires the reader to re-read each sentence multiple times to ascertain what is being communicated. I suggest an edit by a native-English language speaker.

Comment 2: In the first paragraph of the Introduction, there are many strong statements concerning the PRC's success with poverty alleviation. However, this needs to be supported with hard data and references.

Comment 3: "Along with the complete success of the competition against poverty" - The paper is making statements that border more on propaganda than research science.  Please cite the studies that refer to the PRC's "complete success" on this topic.

Comment 4: rural revitalization - Please cite other studies which have used this term and studied its effects.

Comment 5: “three rural” problems, that support rural revitalization and promote urban besides rural 58 development. - Please cite other studies which have used these terms and studied their effects.

Comment 6: "Most scholars principally depend on the sustainable livelihood framework theory established by the Department for International Development (DFID) to create a livelihood capital evaluation index 83 system" - Whose DFID are the authors referring to? The UK? Please clarify. 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08d3c40f0b64974001734/R7850_Majale_RGUU1_Review.pdf

Comment 7: (Guo et al., 2014; Perz et al., 2015; Chen, 2014; Biggs & Watmough, 2012). - These (and other) citation strings should be in alphabetical order if this citation style is used. However, this is not the citation style used by the journal. Please see this:

"References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including table captions and figure legends) and listed individually at the end of the manuscript. "

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions#preparation

Comment 8: Paragraphs are exceedingly long and difficult to follow. Please shorten them.

Comment 9: Study on the influence of livelihood capital on livelihood strategies. - This is not a complete sentence. Is this a heading?

Comment 10: Meng et al. (2013) took the farmers and herdsmen in Ordos as the research object - What country is "Ordos" in?

Comment 11: Southwest 144 China is one of the regions with the largest number of poor people and the highest incidence of poverty in China, and it is also the main target area in the period of decisive 146 victory in poverty alleviation. - I think some form of table or figure should be inserted here showing poverty rates of this region compared to other regions.

Comment 12: I think Section 2 is the Literature Review....

2. Material and Methods 
This part principally presents the theoretical basis, index system construction, study area, data sources and research methods for this research article. 
2.1. Sustainable Livelihood Theory

Comment 13: "After the 1980s, the United Nations “World Conference on Environment and Development” first clarified the concept of sustainable livelihoods and defined it as a collection of relevant assets, abilities and income-generating activities owned and acquired by 184 individuals or families in order to maintain their own development (Qiu et al., 2007)." - I went to the reference for this passage and downloaded the paper. I then searched on the key ideas in this passage and could find no words that matched the citation. Can this be clarified? Also, are the reference last names and first names in the correct order?

http://www.ecologica.cn/ch/reader/download_pdf_file.aspx?journal_id=stxben&file_name=6B2796D108ECC9966A3C950F7DD554C8ECF9E85842E2C232D17D4761B07704A8DAA112EBE1145C075BD05CDDD811F8AE2BF5EC529DBB2D923B80C3ED5373A6FA&open_type=self&file_no=stxben20070401

Comment 14: The Department for International Development (DFID) proposed a sustainable livelihood analysis framework, which consists of five parts: vulnerability background, liveli-187 hood capital, structure and system, livelihood strategy and livelihood output, as shown 188 in Figure 1. - Please cite where this information is coming from as well as indicate the source of Figure 1. 

Comment 15: Livelihood capital mainly refers to the natural capital, social capital, financial capital, physical capital and human capital needed to maintain life or obtain development. Structure and system refer to the impact of organizational structure, political system, policies and measures on livelihood. Livelihood strategy is the use of livelihood capital and the choice of lifestyle after livelihood capital combination. Livelihood strategies are always fluid, changing with internal and external circumstances. Livelihood  output is also called livelihood outcome, including multiple outcomes such as increased income, high level of welfare, good living conditions, and low vulnerability. - This passage needs citations. My search of Google Scholar shows numerous and recent research for these ideas. 

Comment 16: 2.2. Index System Construction - There is a lot of detailed information in this section from a lot of sources. They need to be cited.

Comment 17: (103 ° 36'-109 ° 35′ E, 24 ° 37′-29 ° 13′ N) - Latitudes and longitudes are not necessary when describing entire regions.

Comment 18: Table 3 is very difficult to read. Please reformat.

Comment 19: ??? = (??? − ?????)/(????? − ?????) - Formulas should be numbered e.g. (1).

Comment 20: What software are the authors using for their analysis?

Comment 21: this paper divides the farmers into three types according to the source of economic income: pure agriculture, part-time and non-agricultural type. - I am confused. Does a non-agricultural farmer a fisherman? What is a non-agricultural farmer? Please give some examples of this classification. 

Comment 22: These formulas need to be re-numbered as there are previous formulas in the text:

?? (??1/1−??1)=?10+?11?1+,…,+?1??? (1) 381
?? (??2/1−??2)=?20+?21?1+,…,+?2??? (2) 382
?? (??3/1−??3)=?30+?31?1+,…,+?3??? (3) 383

Comment 23: these numbers are not is the correct sequence form highest to lowest. 

0.4038, 0.4279, 0.3364, 0.2139 and 0.2018 respectively. 

Comment 24: The most important aspect should be discussed first, followed by the the 2nd most important aspect, etc. 

Among them, natural capital is relatively high with an asset value of 0.4038. The area 419 of cultivated land and forest land is an important indicator of natural capital. For farmers, 420 especially in poor areas, land is an important means of production to achieve the goal of 421 livelihood. In Table 4, the index value of per capita cultivated land area is 0.4653, and the 422 index value of per capita forest land area is 0.1124.

Comment 25: In Table 5, use a note to identify what the headings represent. 

Livelihood Capital, B, S.E, Sig., EXP(B)

Comment 26: "For instance, the more area of forestry land besides cultivated land, more likely farmers select agricultural planting to attain income." - It is not clear to me how land with trees helps with land cultivation and planting.

Comment 27: Please move the text discussion for each table BEFORE the table, not afterwards. 

Comment 28: The RESULTS section and its tables have a significant "discussion" concerning each table's findings. However, there are no citations/references that support the authors' opinions. I also note there is a DISCUSSION section as well. I think the 2 sections should be merged or the detailed discussion in the RESULTS should be moved to the DISCUSSION section. Either way, there needs to be supporting studies for the authors' opinions.

Comment 29: The following makes no sense. How can 0.4038 be higher than 0.4279? 

(1) From the perspective of livelihood capital, the five categories of livelihood capital are generally not high. Among them, the asset value of physical capital is the highest, which is 0.4038; the financial capital value is the lowest, which is only 0.2018; the natural capital, human capital and social capital value are between the two, which are 0.4279, 0.3364 and 0.2139 respectively.

Author Response

Comment 1: The English text is very difficult to follow. It requires the reader to re-read each sentence multiple times to ascertain what is being communicated. I suggest an edit by a native-English language speaker.

Response 1: Thank you very much for taking the time to read this paper. We have used the English editing service to revise English grammar and other writing problems.

Comment 2: In the first paragraph of the Introduction, there are many strong statements concerning the PRC's success with poverty alleviation. However, this needs to be supported with hard data and references.

Response 2: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. I'm sorry for the lack of citation and explanation of some arguments in the thesis writing. In the revised manuscript, I have added references or explanations for the places in the paper that need to be revised. If there is anything unclear in the explanation, please give more criticism and guidance. Thanks again!

Comment 3: "Along with the complete success of the competition against poverty" - The paper is making statements that border more on propaganda than research science.  Please cite the studies that refer to the PRC's "complete success" on this topic.

Response 3: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. In the revised manuscript, I have cited the studies that refer to the PRC's "complete success" on this topic.

Comment 4: rural revitalization - Please cite other studies which have used this term and studied its effects.

Response 4: Thank you for your comment. This article has already cited other studies on "rural revitalization".

Comment 5: “three rural” problems, that support rural revitalization and promote urban besides rural 58 development. - Please cite other studies which have used these terms and studied their effects.

Response 5: Thank you very much. Related references have been added.

Comment 6: "Most scholars principally depend on the sustainable livelihood framework theory established by the Department for International Development (DFID) to create a livelihood capital evaluation index 83 system" - Whose DFID are the authors referring to? The UK? Please clarify. 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08d3c40f0b64974001734/R7850_Majale_RGUU1_Review.pdf

Response 6: Yes, DFID sustainable livelihood analysis framework was proposed by the UK Department for International Development. 

Comment 7: (Guo et al., 2014; Perz et al., 2015; Chen, 2014; Biggs & Watmough, 2012). - These (and other) citation strings should be in alphabetical order if this citation style is used. However, this is not the citation style used by the journal. Please see this:

"References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including table captions and figure legends) and listed individually at the end of the manuscript. "

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/instructions#preparation

Response 7: Thank you very much. In the revised manuscript, I have revised the citation format for references.

Comment 8: Paragraphs are exceedingly long and difficult to follow. Please shorten them.

Response 8: Thank you for your suggestion. I'm sorry, my English level needs to be improved. For some paragraphs, I have made appropriate reductions.

Comment 9: Study on the influence of livelihood capital on livelihood strategies. - This is not a complete sentence. Is this a heading?

Response 9: Yes, this is the form of a title. This paragraph mainly introduces the literature review about the impact of livelihood capital on livelihood strategies.

Comment 10: Meng et al. (2013) took the farmers and herdsmen in Ordos as the research object - What country is "Ordos" in?

Response 10: Ordos is in China.

Comment 11: Southwest 144 China is one of the regions with the largest number of poor people and the highest incidence of poverty in China, and it is also the main target area in the period of decisive 146 victory in poverty alleviation. - I think some form of table or figure should be inserted here showing poverty rates of this region compared to other regions.

Response 11: Thanks for your feedback. I revised this paragraph and added relevant data and references.

Comment 12: I think Section 2 is the Literature Review....

Response 12: Thank you very much. According to your suggestion, I changed section 2 into literature review.

Comment 13: "After the 1980s, the United Nations “World Conference on Environment and Development” first clarified the concept of sustainable livelihoods and defined it as a collection of relevant assets, abilities and income-generating activities owned and acquired by 184 individuals or families in order to maintain their own development (Qiu et al., 2007)." - I went to the reference for this passage and downloaded the paper. I then searched on the key ideas in this passage and could find no words that matched the citation. Can this be clarified? Also, are the reference last names and first names in the correct order?

http://www.ecologica.cn/ch/reader/download_pdf_file.aspx?journal_id=stxben&file_name=6B2796D108ECC9966A3C950F7DD554C8ECF9E85842E2C232D17D4761B07704A8DAA112EBE1145C075BD05CDDD811F8AE2BF5EC529DBB2D923B80C3ED5373A6FA&open_type=self&file_no=stxben20070401

Response 13: Thank you very much. Sorry for the inaccurate format of the references cited, I have carefully revised and corrected them.

Comment 14: The Department for International Development (DFID) proposed a sustainable livelihood analysis framework, which consists of five parts: vulnerability background, liveli-187 hood capital, structure and system, livelihood strategy and livelihood output, as shown 188 in Figure 1. - Please cite where this information is coming from as well as indicate the source of Figure 1. 

Response 14: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. In the revised manuscript, I have supplemented the relevant sources of information as well as the source of Figure 1.

Comment 15: Livelihood capital mainly refers to the natural capital, social capital, financial capital, physical capital and human capital needed to maintain life or obtain development. Structure and system refer to the impact of organizational structure, political system, policies and measures on livelihood. Livelihood strategy is the use of livelihood capital and the choice of lifestyle after livelihood capital combination. Livelihood strategies are always fluid, changing with internal and external circumstances. Livelihood  output is also called livelihood outcome, including multiple outcomes such as increased income, high level of welfare, good living conditions, and low vulnerability. - This passage needs citations. My search of Google Scholar shows numerous and recent research for these ideas. 

Response 15: Thanks for your suggestion, I have added many references to this passage.

Comment 16: 2.2. Index System Construction - There is a lot of detailed information in this section from a lot of sources. They need to be cited.

Response 16: Thank you very much. According to your suggestion, this section adds a number of references to citations.

Comment 17: (103 ° 36'-109 ° 35′ E, 24 ° 37′-29 ° 13′ N) - Latitudes and longitudes are not necessary when describing entire regions.

Response 17: Thanks for your suggestion. Latitudes and longitudes have been deleted.

Comment 18: Table 3 is very difficult to read. Please reformat.

Response 18: In the revised manuscript, the format of Table 3 has been modified.

Comment 19: ??? = (??? − ?????)/(????? − ?????) - Formulas should be numbered e.g. (1).

Response 19: Thanks for your suggestion. I have numbered this formula.

Comment 20: What software are the authors using for their analysis?

Response 20: In this paper, the entropy method and the Logistic regression model are mainly used, and SPSSAU and STATA software are used for data analysis.

Comment 21: this paper divides the farmers into three types according to the source of economic income: pure agriculture, part-time and non-agricultural type. - I am confused. Does a non-agricultural farmer a fisherman? What is a non-agricultural farmer? Please give some examples of this classification. 

Response 21: In this paper, pure agricultural farmers mainly refer to farmers whose family income mainly depends on agricultural planting and livestock breeding. Non-agricultural farmers mainly refer to family income, which is not derived from agricultural income, but through working in factories, doing small businesses, opening restaurants, entrepreneurship and so on. Farmers between the pure agricultural type and the non-agricultural type are part-time farmers.

Comment 22: These formulas need to be re-numbered as there are previous formulas in the text:

?? (??1/1−??1)=?10+?11?1+,…,+?1??? (1) 381
?? (??2/1−??2)=?20+?21?1+,…,+?2??? (2) 382
?? (??3/1−??3)=?30+?31?1+,…,+?3??? (3) 383

Response 22: Thank you very much. I have re-numbered these formulas.

Comment 23: these numbers are not is the correct sequence form highest to lowest. 

0.4038, 0.4279, 0.3364, 0.2139 and 0.2018 respectively. 

Response 23: I have corrected the order of these numbers. I have corrected the order of these numbers.

Comment 24: The most important aspect should be discussed first, followed by the the 2nd most important aspect, etc. 

Among them, natural capital is relatively high with an asset value of 0.4038. The area 419 of cultivated land and forest land is an important indicator of natural capital. For farmers, 420 especially in poor areas, land is an important means of production to achieve the goal of 421 livelihood. In Table 4, the index value of per capita cultivated land area is 0.4653, and the 422 index value of per capita forest land area is 0.1124.

Response 24: Thank you very much. It has been modified according to your suggestion. The most important aspect is discussed first, followed by the 2nd most important aspect, etc.

Comment 25: In Table 5, use a note to identify what the headings represent. 

Livelihood Capital, B, S.E, Sig., EXP(B)

Response 25: Thank you very much. According to your suggestion, I have used a note to identify what the headings represent. 

Comment 26: "For instance, the more area of forestry land besides cultivated land, more likely farmers select agricultural planting to attain income." - It is not clear to me how land with trees helps with land cultivation and planting.

Response 26: I'm sorry I may not have made it clear. This sentence means that the more forest land and cultivated land, the more likely farmers are to choose agricultural planting as a means of livelihood to obtain income. For cultivated land, farmers can earn income by planting crops. For forest land, in addition to planting trees, farmers can also plant economic forests. Economic forests are the forests whose main purpose is to produce forest products such as fruits, edible oils, industrial raw materials and medicinal materials other than wood. Therefore, farmers can obtain income by planting economic forests.

Comment 27: Please move the text discussion for each table BEFORE the table, not afterwards. 

Response 27: Thank you very much. According to your suggestion, I have moved the text discussion of each table to the front of the table.

Comment 28: The RESULTS section and its tables have a significant "discussion" concerning each table's findings. However, there are no citations/references that support the authors' opinions. I also note there is a DISCUSSION section as well. I think the 2 sections should be merged or the detailed discussion in the RESULTS should be moved to the DISCUSSION section. Either way, there needs to be supporting studies for the authors' opinions.

Response 28: Thank you very much. I quite agree with you. I added references to support the point of view of the paper. This is how I think about it. This article divides the "results" and "discussion" into two parts to write. The "results" part focuses on an empirical result calculated through research data and methods, and analyzes the results in detail. The "discussion" part focuses on the differences and connections between the research results of this paper and other scholars, as well as the limitations of this study.

Comment 29: The following makes no sense. How can 0.4038 be higher than 0.4279? 

(1) From the perspective of livelihood capital, the five categories of livelihood capital are generally not high. Among them, the asset value of physical capital is the highest, which is 0.4038; the financial capital value is the lowest, which is only 0.2018; the natural capital, human capital and social capital value are between the two, which are 0.4279, 0.3364 and 0.2139 respectively.

Response 29: Thank you very much for your serious review. I am sorry that I accidentally wrote the values of the two indicators of physical capital and natural capital in reverse when I wrote it. I have made corrections. Thanks again.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I congratulate the authors for the effort to increase the quality of the work. Most of the comments were carefully addressed and reviewed. I can accept that it is the decision of the authors to provide or not in the appendix the details of the questionnaires used, but I consider that the sections on methods would have been much improved by a more transparent and clear presentation.
My final remarks are:
1. I remain to the opinion expressed in my first rewiev in "Point 10: Point 4 emphasizes again the method of entropy, but from my point of view it is unclear how to apply its in the paper for this field and how it supports the authors' conclusions.

At point 5 For the conclusions, the logistics function provided support, but I have the same remarks on the ambiguity of the statement on the use of the entropy method. "
In your answer you say: “The reason why this paper adopts the entropy method is mainly because it is an objective weighting method, which can avoid the influence of subjective factors that may be affected in the process of determining the index weight. Therefore, this paper adopts the entropy method to measure and evaluate the livelihood capital. ", But precisely by not exposing the data from interviews and questionnaires, where the subjective factors can be found, I do not find sufficient scientific argumentation.
2. Greater attention, but also openness in the communication or in the exposure of the methodlogies and data, would contribute to the increase of scientific rigorousness and would attract more attention and interest of the reader. 

Success!

Author Response

1. I remain to the opinion expressed in my first rewiev in "Point 10: Point 4 emphasizes again the method of entropy, but from my point of view it is unclear how to apply its in the paper for this field and how it supports the authors' conclusions.

At point 5 For the conclusions, the logistics function provided support, but I have the same remarks on the ambiguity of the statement on the use of the entropy method. "
In your answer you say: “The reason why this paper adopts the entropy method is mainly because it is an objective weighting method, which can avoid the influence of subjective factors that may be affected in the process of determining the index weight. Therefore, this paper adopts the entropy method to measure and evaluate the livelihood capital. ", But precisely by not exposing the data from interviews and questionnaires, where the subjective factors can be found, I do not find sufficient scientific argumentation.

2. Greater attention, but also openness in the communication or in the exposure of the methodlogies and data, would contribute to the increase of scientific rigorousness and would attract more attention and interest of the reader. 

Response：Thanks a lot for your feedback. Sorry I may still not explain clearly. In this revised manuscript, I have further supplemented and improved the research methods section.

The questions involved in the questionnaire survey in this paper are mainly reflected in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3, including 508 questionnaire data. The questionnaire data is too much, it is inconvenient to disclose it in the paper, please understand. The entropy method is actually a relatively simple evaluation method of the index system. It mainly uses the survey data to calculate the index weight. It can be applied to various fields of calculating the index weight. Of course, it can also be applied to the sustainable livelihood of farmers. Many scholars also adopted this method. After calculating the weight of each index, the index value of each index is finally obtained by weighting, so that the index values can be compared and analyzed. The entropy method is an objective weighting method, which is generally calculated by mathematical statistical methods and techniques. However, subjective methods such as AHP generally rely on expert scores to give weight to indicators, which is too subjective and may lead to imprecise conclusions. That's why I used the more objective entropy method to calculate the index. And there is special software for calculation, which is easy and fast to operate. In addition, I published two core journal papers last year, both of which used the entropy method. I am familiar with this method, so I still chose this method this time. Of course, each method has certain limitations. The entropy method is relatively dependent on the sample, and the weight will fluctuate to a certain extent as the sample changes. In the next paper writing, I plan to use a combination of subjective and objective evaluation methods to study. I also hope that I can try more and better writing methods in the future to continuously improve my scientific research level. Thanks again!

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors faild to address the reviewer comments properly.

Author Response

Thanks again for your review and feedback. According to your suggestion, I have further revised and improved the paper again.

Point 1: The introduced is not linked with results and discussion.

Response 1: In the revised manuscript, this article adds another part, namely “3.2. Theoretical Analysis Framework”.  I hope it can improve readers' understanding of this study.

Point 2: Need to add new findings in the conclusion.

Response 2: In the revised manuscript, this article adds some new findings in the conclusion.   

Point 3: The English language need extensive editing.

Response 3: In the revised manuscript, we have used the English editing service to revise English grammar and other writing problems.

Point 4: In addition the novelty of the paper need to be ensured. What is the novelty of your paper?

Response 4: In the revised manuscript, the author adds the innovation of the paper in the discussion part.

Point 5: The objectives are not clear as well. 

Response 5: In the revised manuscript, the author states the research objectives of this paper more clearly in the literature review part. Thank you very much!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

First, the authors have made significant improvement in the article after revising it. Majority of the issues highlighted in the first review have been solved. However, there are still some minor issues, that authors need to revise before it is published in the journal. 

1. I understand your explanation on the use of interviews and field studies in the response letter, however, it is inappropriate if we write it in methods, but do not present it in results. Either the data collected in 20 in-depth interviews should be presented in the results, and it should be discussed in the discussion, OR, the methods sections should be revised, by making it a study used entropy method and the Logistic regression model only. 

Author Response

Point 1: I understand your explanation on the use of interviews and field studies in the response letter, however, it is inappropriate if we write it in methods, but do not present it in results. Either the data collected in 20 in-depth interviews should be presented in the results, and it should be discussed in the discussion, OR, the methods sections should be revised, by making it a study used entropy method and the Logistic regression model only. 

Response 1: Thanks again for your valuable advice. The data used in this empirical study are mainly from the questionnaire data, rather than these interview records. The data collected from these interview records mainly include detailed introduction of each case site, and some written records such as dialogues with village cadres and local villagers, in order to help us better understand the livelihood of farmers and help us verify the reliability of the research conclusions. Therefore, these written interview records are not specifically included in the results of the thesis. In fact, the contents of some interview records are consistent with the research results of this paper. The data used in the empirical analysis of the paper mainly comes from the 508 questionnaires collected. The main questions involved in the questionnaire are mainly reflected in Tables 1, 2 and 3. The research results of this paper are mainly calculated through the questionnaire data. Since the collected questionnaire data has different index units, it is necessary to standardize the data first. Then, the index system calculation and regression analysis are carried out according to the standardized data. The calculation process can be completed by data analysis software.

In addition, according to your suggestion, in this revised manuscript, the research methods part has been further supplemented and improved. Thanks again!

Reviewer 4 Report

Manuscript ID: sustainability-1655482, I believe the manuscript has been sufficiently improved.

Author Response

I believe the manuscript has been sufficiently improved.

Thank you very much for the in-depth review and comments that has greatly improved this paper. Thanks again!

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have tried their best to address the reviewers comments. The article is now in good shape for publication