An Analytical Framework for Formulating Conservation and Development Measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article discusses the challenges facing Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS) in the context of modernisation and the need for dynamic conservation approaches. The authors propose an analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development using the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model, which they apply to the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System.

The framework is used to analyse the supporting mechanisms for the stable state of the system, diagnose its threats and challenges, and formulate 34 conservation and development actions in six groups. The authors suggest that their framework has the potential to be a general tool for the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS.

General considerations
The research question is not defined. The results only say that the DPSIR model should be used, but they do not tell us why. Why this model? Is this the only model? There is no scientific methodology! There is no hypothesis. So, the results cannot be interpreted.

The article is too complex, cites too many sources and references and is full of statistical data. Thirdly, there is no interpretation.

It is difficult to publish this work because it seems like a report and lacks basic scientific methods.

The English language is appropriate and understandable, even if it sometimes seems mechanical. The article could benefit from a review by a native speaker.

Detailed comments

Figure 1: The arrows in Figure 1 are inconsistently placed. It can be assumed that the individual groups (driver, pressure, state, and impact) react to each other as groups. Still, the arrows for the reaction group are not arranged according to the previous methodology. Additionally, boxes with dots ...... (6 points) can be found in four groups. This must be explained in the description of the figure or has to be addressed in the diagram itself, as the meaning is not clear.

Figure 4: Is not properly credited as can be found in the report titled: "GIAHS Proposal Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System the People's Government of Shexian County, Hebei Province, P. R. China May, 2022" on page 13. No authors are named in the report. https://www.fao.org/3/cc0704en/cc0704en.pdf

Line 262 reads: (We interviewed ten representative farmers in the heritage site and collected …) What/where were the results of this survey? Where is the interpretation?

Line 266 reads: "We also held discussions with related management and technical departments like the local bureaus of agriculture and rural affairs, culture and tourism, and natural resources, to understand the threats and challenges facing the SDSTS and the relevant work the local government has conducted to deal with these threats and challenges and its effectiveness …" What/where are the results of these interviews? Where is the interpretation?

 

 

Author Response

Responses to reviewer 1

1. The research question is not defined. The results only say that the DPSIR model should be used, but they do not tell us why. Why this model? Is this the only model? There is no scientific methodology! There is no hypothesis. So, the results cannot be interpreted.

Responses: Thank you for the comment.

• As to the research question, this study aims to answer the question of “how to formulate effective conservation and development measures for important agricultural heritage systems”. These heritage systems are now facing great threats and challenges brought by modernization, but few studies provide theoretical and practical support for developing effective conservation and development measures for them. To fill this gap, this study put forward an analytical framework and apply the framework to a representative agricultural heritage system. To more clearly state the research question, we have revised the introduction part. Please see lines 96-105.

 

Lines 96-105: 

“......In the context of modernization, therefore, how to formulate effective conservation and development measures for IAHS has become a critical question. However, few studies provide theoretical methods and practical cases as support for the formulation of IAHS conservation and development measures.

To fill this gap, we put forward an analytical framework for formulating IAHS conservation and development measures based on the Driver - Pressure - State - Impact - Response (DPSIR) model in this study and apply this framework to Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS), a China-NIAHS designated in 2014 as well as a GIAHS designated in 2022......”

 

• As to the DPSIR model, the reason why we choose this model is that it is suitable for IAHS conservation research. In our previous study, we reviewed a great amount of literature related to IAHS conservation and found that IAHS and their conservation presented a logical relationship of driver, pressure, state, impact and response. We elaborate this logical relationship as well as the appropriateness of this model in this manuscript. Of course, we admit that the DPSIR model is not the only model for this research field. To explain the reason more clearly, we have revised the methodology part. Please see lines142-164. We have also revised the discussion part, and pointed out the DPSIR model is not the only model. Please see lines 715-719. 

 

Lines 142-164:

“In the previous study, we reviewed a great amount of IAHS conservation literature in the past two decades and found that IAHS and their conservation presented a logical relationship of driver, pressure, state, impact and response (Jiao et al., 2021). This logical relationship can be summarized into the following three aspects. Firstly, ......Secondly, ......Thirdly, ......

Following such a logical relationship, we think the DPSIR model is suitable for IAHS conservation research and put forward an analytical framework for formulating IAHS conservation and development measures based on this model (Fig.1). In this DPSIR-based analytical framework, the five categories are defined as follows.”

 

Lines 715-719:

“......Last but not least, the DPSIR model is not the only model suitable for IAHS conservation. Explorations on other models to support the formulation of IAHS conservation and management measures are of great significance and represent the research directions in the future.”

 

2. The article is too complex, cites too many sources and references and is full of statistical data. Thirdly, there is no interpretation.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. Agricultural heritage systems are complex, adaptive systems, and increasingly challenged by modernization. To formulate effective conservation and management measures, we must fully understand their characteristics and values as well as the threats and challenges they face. So, we think it is necessary to cite enough references to elaborate these in-depth and help readers understand these clearly.

 

As to the statistical data, they are mainly displayed in tables 1 and 2. We use two paragraphs to interpret tables 1 and 2 respectively. Table 1 and its interpretation (please see lines 363-379) is used to support the economic importance of the heritage system that has not ensured the local population’s food security but also enhanced farmers’ incomes and regional development. Table 2 and its interpretation (please see lines 408-418) is used to demonstrate, despite the large number of migrant workers, the sectors related to agricultural heritage systems have promoted the employment of local labor force.

 

3. The English language is appropriate and understandable, even if it sometimes seems mechanical. The article could benefit from a review by a native speaker.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. Following this suggestion, we have polished the manuscript and asked a native speaker for help.

 

4. Figure 1:The arrows in Figure 1 are inconsistently placed. It can be assumed that the individual groups (driver, pressure, state, and impact) react to each other as groups. Still, the arrows for the reaction group are not arranged according to the previous methodology. Additionally, boxes with dots ...... (6 points) can be found in four groups. This must be explained in the description of the figure or has to be addressed in the diagram itself, as the meaning is not clear.

Responses: Thank you for this valuable comment. According to your suggestions, we have revised figure 1 by changing the dots to “others” and adding the description of the arrows and boxes. Please see Figure 1 on line188. .

 

Figure 1. The DPSIR-based analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development measure formulation.

 

5. Figure 4:Is not properly credited as can be found in the report titled: "GIAHS Proposal Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System the People's Government of Shexian County, Hebei Province, P. R. China May, 2022" on page 13. No authors are named in the report. https://www.fao.org/3/cc0704en/cc0704en.pdf

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We promise that we drew the figure and had its original files. This figure appeared in the proposal of Shexian heritage system because we provided technical support for Shexian to apply for GIAHS. Our names didn’t appear in the proposal due to the limitations of the proposal format, but FAO and Chinese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs can prove it. Anyway, to avoid any misunderstanding, we added a description of the figure’s source. Please see lines 336-337.

 

Lines 336-337:

”Figure 4. Spatial structure and important functions of the SDSTS. Note: The figure was drawn by the authors and used in the GIAHS proposal of the SDSTS as scientific support.”

 

6. Line 262 reads:(We interviewed ten representative farmers in the heritage site and collected…) What/where were the results of this survey? Where is the interpretation?

Responses: Thank you for the comment. According to this comment, we have revised the section of data collection, so as to explain the utilization of the data more clearly. Please see lines 265-300.

 

Lines 265-300:

”The questionnaire survey was mainly carried out ...... After sorting and statistical analysis, the survey data is mainly shown in Table 1 and Table 2, to support the analysis of economic mechanism and labor employment.

We interviewed ten representative farmers ...... The interview data and information was sorted and interpreted from the perspectives of ecological and social mechanisms. The interpretation results are shown in sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2.

We also held discussions with ...... The data and information obtained from the discussions were summarized and classified. Their interpretation results, shown in section 3.2, have supported the diagnosis of threats and challenges.

In addition to the first-hand data, we also collected a large number of secondary data, ...... When we develop the conservation and management measures, we need to take into account this kind of data to ensure the feasibility of the measures to the largest extent. Besides, we also collected literature data related to the SDSTS through literature research. The literature data is mainly used in the analysis of ecological and social mechanisms to guarantee the scientific nature of the analysis.

 

7. Line 266 reads: "We also held discussions with related management and technical departments like the local bureaus of agriculture and rural affairs, culture and tourism, and natural resources, to understand the threats and challenges facing the SDSTS and the relevant work the local government has conducted to deal with these threats and challenges and its effectiveness …" What/where are the results of these interviews? Where is the interpretation?

Responses: Thank you for the comment. According to this comment, we have revised the section of data collection, so as to explain the utilization of the data more clearly. Please see lines 265-300.

 

Lines 265-300:

”The questionnaire survey was mainly carried out ...... After sorting and statistical analysis, the survey data is mainly shown in Table 1 and Table 2, to support the analysis of economic mechanism and labor employment.

We interviewed ten representative farmers ...... The interview data and information was sorted and interpreted from the perspectives of ecological and social mechanisms. The interpretation results are shown in sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2.

We also held discussions with ...... The data and information obtained from the discussions were summarized and classified. Their interpretation results, shown in section 3.2, have supported the diagnosis of threats and challenges.

In addition to the first-hand data, we also collected a large number of secondary data, ...... When we develop the conservation and management measures, we need to take into account this kind of data to ensure the feasibility of the measures to the largest extent. Besides, we also collected literature data related to the SDSTS through literature research. The literature data is mainly used in the analysis of ecological and social mechanisms to guarantee the scientific nature of the analysis.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System (SDSTS) in China was listed as a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) in 2022. The main objective of the study was to properly formulate the conservation and management options for this globally important area using the Driver - Pressure - State - Impact – Response (DPSIR) model. In doing so, authors analyzed the supporting mechanisms for the stable state of the Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (IAHS), and also identified the opportunities and threats facing the IAHS. Based on this knowledge, they formulated conservation and management measures in regards to management mechanism construction, ecological conservation, cultural inheritance, green and organic product development, sustainable tourism development, and capacity building.

 

Strengths: A comprehensive, logically, clearly and illustratively presented example of the application of the DPSIR model to areas of high biocultural value. Such territories are today in most cases losing the struggle for their survival with the growing trend of economic, technological and socio-cultural transformation. It is therefore all the more important to accurately formulate measures for the further development and protection of such territories on the basis of a thorough collection and analysis of data on all relevant aspects .   Weaknesses: I do not consider the application of the DPSIR model to a model area with biocultural values to be innovative. The application of the DPSIR model in SDSTS IAHS as well as elaboration of conservation and management measures in terms of selected aspects can be considered as inspirative for use in IAHS of other countries. Thus, the use of the DPSIR model may have some potential to be, as the authors claim, "a general tool for the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS".  . Comments to individual parts:

 

254 - … participants were the cadres of these villages. I think that in connection with a sociological questionnaire, the term "cadres" should not be used, which implies a politically conditioned selection of persons who participated in a sociological survey. It would be more appropriate to use the word "stakeholder" in the context of the analyzed text.

Author Response

Responses to reviewer 2

1. I do not consider the application of the DPSIR model to a model area with biocultural values to be innovative. The application of the DPSIR model in SDSTS IAHS as well as elaboration of conservation and management measures in terms of selected aspects can be considered as inspirative for use in IAHS of other countries. Thus, the use of the DPSIR model may have some potential to be, as the authors claim, "a general tool for the dynamic conservation and sustainable development of IAHS".

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We added this comment to the discussion part. Please see lines 707-708.

Lines 707-708:

“......The application of this framework in the SDSTS can be considered as inspirational for the use in IAHS of other countries......” 

 

2. 254 - … participants were the cadres of these villages. I think that in connection with a sociological questionnaire, the term "cadres" should not be used, which implies a politically conditioned selection of persons who participated in a sociological survey. It would be more appropriate to use the word "stakeholder" in the context of the analyzed text.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. According to this comment, we have revised the “cadres” to “the members of the village committees”. Please see line 266.

Line 266:

”The questionnaire survey was mainly carried out for the 46 administrative villages in the heritage site, and the participants were the members of the village committees.......” 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Specific suggestions by line number

34          omit “the”

57          change “forth” to “quarter”

96          The use of past tense (such as “made”) in this whole para is unusual; present tense would be more conventional, and I think better.

176        the qualification of “undesired” seems unnecessary and even incorrect!

226        It would be helpful to readers to be told when the stonework was mostly assembled.

241        Is “late” really what is intended here, or is it actually “early”?

271        change “second-hand” to “secondary”

285        change “adaptable” to “adapted” and “stronger” to “strong”

368        the slope reported in Figure 5 could benefit from having units designated

374        omit “do”

376        add s to “income”

392        The line “Inheriting traditional culture” is unclear in meaning and importance!

401        changing “will” to “could possibly’ would make this rather unscientific sentence less objectionable

402        “superior” seems quite superfluous

499        change “forth” to “fourth”

517        change “band” to “brand”

570        change “alive” to “living”

608        remove end “ed” from “leveled”

 

General

The current title: “The DPSIR-based analytical framework for IAHS conservation 2 and development: An application to Shexian Dryland Stone 3 Terraced System, China” is unacceptable not just because of the deployment of acronyms but also because the “framework” is not tested in any sort of scientific manner. Accordingly, a more accurate title could be: “A framework for rural cultural conservation: An advocacy essay for the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System, China”.

Author Response

Responses to reviewer 3

1. Line 34    omit “the”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have deleted “the”.

 

2. Line 57    change “forth” to “quarter”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 60.

Line 60:

“......among them, 19 GIAHS are located in China, accounting for about one quarter of the total......” 

 

3. Line 96    The use of past tense (such as “made”) in this whole para is unusual; present tense would be more conventional, and I think better.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see lines 105-112.

Line 105-112:

“......In Section 2, we make a detailed description of the analytical framework based on the DPSIR model and then introduce the study area and data collection. In Section 3, we first analyze the supportive mechanisms for the stable state of the SDSTS, then we make a systematic diagnosis of the pressures and their negative impacts, and finally we formulate conservation and development measures to respond to these pressures. In Section 4, we discuss the importance of safeguard measures for implementing conservation and development measures and point out the potentials and limitations of the DPSIR-based analytical framework......”

 

4. Line 176    the qualification of “undesired” seems unnecessary and even incorrect!

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have deleted “undesired”.

 

5. Line 226    It would be helpful to readers to be told when the stonework was mostly assembled.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see lines 236-237.

Line 236-237: 

“......It can be traced back to the twenty-seventh year of the Zhiyuan Age (1290) of the Yuan Dynasty or earlier.”

 

6. Line 241    Is “late” really what is intended here, or is it actually “early”?

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have rewritten the sentence. Please see lines 252-253.

Line 252-253: 

“......Its history is no later than the 27th year of Zhiyuan (a reign title of Kublai Khan) of the Yuan Dynasty (1290)......”

 

7. Line 271    change “second-hand” to “secondary”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 290.

Line 290: 

“In addition to the first-hand data, we also collected a large number of secondary data, ......“

 

8. Line 285    change “adaptable” to “adapted” and “stronger” to “strong”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see lines 308-310.

Line 308-310:

“......These species and varieties are highly adapted to the local natural environment with strong resistance to drought, diseases and stresses as well as more stable yields (He et al., 2020)......” 

 

9. Line 368    the slope reported in Figure 5 could benefit from having units designated

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have added the unit to the slope in Figure 5. Please see Figure 5 on line 393.

 

Figure 5. Changes in precipitation levels and storm frequency of She County since 1990.

 

10. Line 374    omit “do”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have deleted “do”.

 

11. Line 376    add s to “income”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see lines 403-404.

Line 403-404:

“......As incomes from jobs outside the villages are far higher than that from terrace farming, young farmers have even less feeling for the land.......”

 

12. Line 392    The line “Inheriting traditional culture” is unclear in meaning and importance!

Responses: Thank you for the comment. According to this comment, we have added an explanation of the inheritance of traditional culture. Please see lines 419-421.

Line 419-421:

“*Inheritance of traditional culture refers to religious and cultural activities closely related to agricultural heritage, such as traditional rituals (hosts), traditional religions (leaders), and intangible cultural heritage (inheritors).”

 

13. Line 401    changing “will” to “could possibly’ would make this rather unscientific sentence less objectionable

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see lines 430-437.

Line 430-437:

“......The large-scale use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides could possibly damage the soil environment that crops depend on to grow, and affect the quality and yield of such traditional products as Chinese prickly ashes and walnuts. The introduction and promotion of foreign crop varieties could likely have a large impact on the cultivation and production of local varieties. The trend of commoditization could easily cause local varieties to become extinct, along with traditional knowledge such as the breeding, cultivation and management of local varieties.”

 

14. Line 402    “superior” seems quite superfluous

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have deleted “superior”.

 

15. Line 499    change “forth” to “fourth”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 535.

Line 535:

“......fourth, publicizing the SDSTS through publicity handbooks, ......”

 

16. Line 517    change “band” to “brand”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 554.

Line 554:

“......measures on the use of the public brand should be enacted, ......“

 

17. Line 570    change “alive” to “living”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 607.

Line 607:

“......Moreover, as IAHS are living systems, their conservation must be conducted in a dynamic way ......“

 

18. Line 608    remove end “ed” from “leveled”

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have made revisions accordingly. Please see line 647.

Line 647:

“......Secondly, the conservation and utilization association for the SDSTS should be established on the county level on the basis of the village-level association that was established......” 

 

19. The current title: “The DPSIR-based analytical framework for IAHS conservation and development: An application to Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System, China” is unacceptable not just because of the deployment of acronyms but also because the “framework” is not tested in any sort of scientific manner. Accordingly, a more accurate title could be: “A framework for rural cultural conservation: An advocacy essay for the Shexian Dryland Stone Terraced System, China”.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. After careful thinking, we decided to change the title to “An analytical framework for formulating conservation and management measures for Important Agricultural Heritage Systems”.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Line 336 

Please add the citation reference number.

 

Line 394.

Please add the citation reference number.

 

Line 747

Please add the reference for (if not already there) Figures 4 and Figure 5

Author Response

Responses to reviewer 1

1. Line 336 Please add the citation reference number.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have added the source to Figure 4 in the form of footnote. Please see footnote 1 on page 9.

 

2. Line 394 Please add the citation reference number.

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have added the source to Figure 5 in the form of footnote. Please see footnote 2 on page 11.

 

3. Line 747 Please add the reference for (if not already there) Figures 4 and Figure 5

Responses: Thank you for the comment. We have added sources to Figure 4 and Figure 5 in the form of footnote. Please see the responses to the above comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

No further comment

Author Response

Responses to reviewer 3

No further comment

Responses: Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf