Analysis of the Spatial–Temporal Characteristics, Regional Differences, and Obstacle Factors of Agricultural Modernization Development in Gansu Province, China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study is based on 10 years of panel data from different prefecture-level cities in Gansu Province and shows the development of agricultural modernization using an index and model. Some areas need to be clarified or changed, such as:

(1) In the introduction, the authors are trying to explain the different points of view about agriculture and/or modernization. I suggest the authors should add one table about their views also, which can make it easier to understand the comparative narrative about agriculture explained by these authors (W. Schultz, John W. Mellor, and so on).

(2) Please also add a few lines about what modernization of agriculture is.

(3) Please show the position of Gansu within China (you can add a subplot of China where you highlight the Gansu Province). and it is better to add one figure (which should show the study area with the names of the city and state and subregions).

(4) Table 1: Due to the adjustment, it is not clear for some of the city and state which one belongs to which sub-region. Please modify the table again by adjusting the setting. For example, it is not clear whether Jiayuguan city belongs to the Southern Ethnic Region or the Hexi Region.

(5) Please add a Serial No. column in Table 2 also. Secondly, it is not clear how the weight has been assigned to each indicator. There should be an explanation about this.

(6) Please add one more picture, which should show the Comprehensive Development Level of Agricultural Modernization in all 14 selected cities of Gansu Province.

(7) Table 3, it is better to write about the numbers of 1,2,3,4 and so on.

(8) All figures, write the name of the x-axis.

(9) Figures 2, 4, 4, 5, 6, and 7: quality can be improved, especially the figures' text.

(10) Space issue observed (for example, in the article title “Gansu ,China”); please check throughout.

(11) Please be consistent in sub-headings 2.1, 2.2, etc. with capital and small letters; use as per journal guidelines.

(12) Reference style also needs to be consistent and revised as per journal guidelines.

Author Response

Modification description

We sincerely thank the editor and the reviewers for their valuable feedback. We have improved the quality of the manuscript accordingly. The reviewers' comments are listed in italics, and specific issues are numbered. Our responses are given in normal font. The modifications/supplements made to the manuscript are shown in red font, and the corresponding references have been reorganized in the text.

 

Suggestion 1: In the introduction, the authors are trying to explain the different points of view about agriculture and/or modernization. I suggest the authors should add one table about their views also, which can make it easier to understand the comparative narrative about agriculture explained by these authors (W. Schultz, John W. Mellor, and so on).

Response：We thank the reviewer for this helpful suggestion. Accordingly, we have added Table 1 to the Introduction, which succinctly summarizes and contrasts each author’s key perspectives on agriculture and modernization.This table lays out for each author:

Scholar	Core point	Reference
Theodore W. Schultz	The root cause of the difficulty for traditional agriculture to drive economic growth lies in the price fluctuations of the "income flow" caused by the imbalance between market supply and demand. Modern agriculture, after reasonable transformation, can become an important engine for economic growth. It is emphasized that there is an urgency to transform from traditional agriculture to modern agriculture.	[8]
John W. Mellor	The path to agricultural modernization varies among countries due to differences in resources, economic levels and cultures, and it typically goes through three stages: traditional agriculture → low-capital technology agriculture → high-capital technology agriculture.	[9]
Deere	Agricultural modernization is a modernization process with an advanced distribution mechanism.	[10]
Conway,G	From the perspective of agricultural multifunctionality, it emphasizes the role of agriculture in cultural inheritance, social development, and environmental protection; it advocates new models such as ecological agriculture, urban agriculture, and leisure agriculture, promoting the comprehensive upgrading of agriculture and the integration of urban and rural areas.	[11]
Jiang Fuxin	Agricultural modernization is an organic unity composed of the agricultural mechanism system, the productive forces system, and the production materials production and circulation system.	[12]
Gu Huanzhang	Agricultural modernization is a dynamic process in which traditional production sectors gradually evolve into modern industrial sectors, emphasizing the optimization and upgrading of industrial structure.	[13]

 

 

Suggestion 2: Please also add a few lines about what modernization of agriculture is.

Response：We appreciate the reviewer’s recommendation. Accordingly, we have inserted a concise definition of agricultural modernization in lines 76–81 of the revised manuscript. Specifically, we now state:“Based on the above research, this paper defines agricultural modernization as the dynamic evolution process of transforming traditional agriculture into a modern industrial system through the coordinated advancement of technological innovation, institutional adaptation, and optimized factor allocation, with the transformation of agricultural production methods at its core.”This addition clarifies our conceptual framework and grounds the subsequent analysis in a precise, operational definition.

 

Suggestion 3: Please show the position of Gansu within China (you can add a subplot of China where you highlight the Gansu Province). and it is better to add one figure (which should show the study area with the names of the city and state and subregions).

Response：We are grateful for the constructive suggestion made by the reviewer. Therefore, we have prepared Figure 1, which now includes:

1.In the upper right corner, there is a map of China with Gansu Province highlighted in a contrasting color to indicate its position on the national map.

2.The main map shows the detailed research area within Gansu Province, including all prefecture-level cities and the counties they belong to. Each area is clearly labeled.Specifically, these changes have been implemented in lines 146 of the revised manuscript.

 

Suggestion 4:Table 1: Due to the adjustment, it is not clear for some of the city and state which one belongs to which sub-region. Please modify the table again by adjusting the setting. For example, it is not clear whether Jiayuguan city belongs to the Southern Ethnic Region or the Hexi Region.

Response：We thank the reviewer for pointing out this formatting issue. In response, we have reformatted Table 1 to include clear line-segment dividers between each sub-region, and indented all city and state names under their respective region headings. Specifically, these changes have been implemented in lines 153 of the revised manuscript.

 

Suggestion 5: Please add a Serial No. column in Table 2 also. Secondly, it is not clear how the weight has been assigned to each indicator. There should be an explanation about this.

Response：We are grateful for the valuable suggestions provided by the reviewers. Therefore, we have added a "sequence number" column at the beginning of the secondary indicators in the index system table, making it easier to quickly refer to each indicator. Additionally, we have clarified the process for weight allocation: Firstly, the original data is standardized using the minimum-maximum method to eliminate dimension units. Then, the entropy method is applied to the standardized values, and the weight of each indicator is calculated based on its information entropy. This objective method based on goals and data ensures that the weight of each indicator reflects its inherent variability and information contribution (see lines 177 - 180 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 6: Please add one more picture, which should show the Comprehensive Development Level of Agricultural Modernization in all 14 selected cities of Gansu Province.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. Accordingly, we have added Figure 4, a bar chart illustrating the Comprehensive Development Level of Agricultural Modernization for all 14 selected cities in Gansu Province over the four study years. Each city is represented by a grouped bar set, facilitating straightforward comparison across both spatial (city‐to‐city) and temporal (year-to-year) dimensions. This visualization enhances the clarity of our spatial analysis and underscores regional disparities and developmental trajectories (see lines 323 - 341 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 7: Table 3, it is better to write about the numbers of 1,2,3,4 and so on.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this practical suggestion. In the revised manuscript, what was previously Table 3 is now presented as Table 4, and we have added a new “Final Rank” column that explicitly lists the rankings (1, 2, 3, …, 14) for each city based on their comprehensive agricultural modernization scores. This addition makes the ordinal positions immediately clear and enhances the table’s usability(see lines 390 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 8: All figures, write the name of the x-axis.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. In the revised manuscript, every figure now includes an x-axis label (“Year”) to clearly indicate the temporal dimension(see lines 282, 319, 411, 432, 441 and 529 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 9: Figures 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7: quality can be improved, especially the figures' text.

Response：We are grateful for the valuable suggestions provided by the reviewers. To improve the quality of the figures, we have uniformly adopted a high-contrast color scheme for Figures 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7, and enlarged the font sizes of all axis labels, legends and annotations to ensure clear readability at the publication resolution; at the same time, we have optimized the text layout and style.(see lines 282, 319, 411, 432, 441 and 529 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 10: Space issue observed (for example, in the article title “Gansu ,China”); please check throughout.

Response：We are grateful to the reviewer for pointing out this formatting error. In the revised manuscript, we have added the missing space in the title ("Gansu, China") and changed the title "gansu,china" to "Gansu Province, China" for all chapter and sub-chapter titles to ensure consistency in the overall format.

 

Suggestion 11: Please be consistent in sub-headings 2.1, 2.2, etc. with capital and small letters; use as per journal guidelines.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. In the revised manuscript, all sub-headings have been updated to fully comply with MDPI’s capitalization and formatting requirements, ensuring uniformity throughout the document.

 

Suggestion 12: Reference style also needs to be consistent and revised as per journal guidelines.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this important reminder. In the revised manuscript, we have meticulously reformatted the entire reference list to fully comply with the journal’s style guidelines.(see lines 726-844 of the manuscript).

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments:

The manuscript titled "Analysis of the Spatial-Temporal Characteristics, Regional Differences and Obstacle Factors of Agricultural Modernization Development in Gansu, China" (Manuscript ID: sustainability-3631819) investigates the progress of agricultural modernization across 14 cities in Gansu Province over a 10-year period. By integrating various models, the study analyzes key obstacle factors and provides reasonable policy recommendations. The research not only can provide countermeasures and suggestions for strategic planning and decision-making guidance for agricultural modernization development in China, but also holds reference value for similar regions worldwide.

In the opinion of the reviewer, this paper reaches the publication standard of the journal sustainability after addressing the following revisions:

Abstract:

1. When mentioning the province for the first time in the abstract, please specify the country (e.g., "Gansu Province, China").
2. Add one or two sentences in the abstract to briefly introduce the current status of agricultural modernization in Gansu, serving as background information.
3. At the end of the abstract, include a sentence highlighting the significance of the study.
4. Use past tense when describing completed research work; present tense should be reserved for general conclusions, especially those that are widely accepted.
5. The abstract is too long and needs to be more concise.
6. Introduction:
7. Lines 43–45 and the citation of Ref. [1] are inappropriate. The statement that “2015–2025 is a decade of rapid development in Chinese agricultural modernization, and core agricultural areas have entered the stage of smart agriculture” lacks relevance and context. Please substantially revise or shorten Lines 46–52.
8. Lines 65–157 are overly detailed and should be condensed to approximately 40 lines. Unlike a literature review, the purpose of the Introduction is to clearly state the scientific hypothesis behind the study.
9. The significance of this study could be better emphasized. In fact, it not only contributes to agricultural modernization in Gansu, but also offers valuable insights for other similar regions in China and globally.

Research Design:

10. Lines 189–197 and 204–220 are redundant and should be either shortened or moved to the Conclusion and Discussion section.

Data Processing and Result Analysis:

11. Line 289: There appears to be inconsistency between Figures 1 and 2, which show that the main turning point of agricultural modernization occurred in 2018, while the author claims “The first stage was from 2013 to 2017.” Either revise the statement to “The first stage was from 2013 to 2018,” or clearly explain why the original classification remains valid.
12. Line 324: The section number should be corrected from “3..1.2.” to “3.1.2.”
13. Please condense Lines 570–612. For example, Lines 589–592 can be removed as their meaning has already been sufficiently explained in the preceding sentence. Further streamlining is recommended throughout this section.

Author Response

Modification description

We sincerely thank the editor and the reviewers for their valuable feedback. We have improved the quality of the manuscript accordingly. The reviewers' comments are listed in italics, and specific issues are numbered. Our responses are given in normal font. The modifications/supplements made to the manuscript are shown in red font, and the corresponding references have been reorganized in the text.

 

Suggestion 1: When mentioning the province for the first time in the abstract, please specify the country (e.g., "Gansu Province, China").

Response：We thank the reviewer for this helpful suggestion. In response, we have revised the first mention of the province in the abstract to read “Gansu Province, China,” ensuring clarity for international readers. (lines 13–14 of the manuscript)

 

Suggestion 2: Add one or two sentences in the abstract to briefly introduce the current status of agricultural modernization in Gansu, serving as background information.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this valuable suggestion. In response, we have added background information to the abstract (lines 13–17 of the manuscript), briefly introducing the current status of agricultural modernization in Gansu Province. This includes its ecological characteristics and recent progress through technological and institutional advancements, providing clearer context for the study.

 

Suggestion 3: At the end of the abstract, include a sentence highlighting the significance of the study.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this insightful suggestion. Accordingly, we have added the following sentence at the end of the abstract to emphasize the significance of the study: “It is expected that through the continuous development of the level of agricultural modernization, the coordinated development of agricultural modernization in Gansu Province can be promoted, and further, the well-being of the people can be enhanced and the rural revitalization strategy can be advanced in depth.” (lines 35–39 of the manuscript)

 

Suggestion 4:Use past tense when describing completed research work; present tense should be reserved for general conclusions, especially those that are widely accepted.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this important reminder regarding tense consistency. In response, we have carefully reviewed and revised the literature summary in the manuscript to ensure that past tense is consistently used when describing completed research work, while present tense is retained for widely accepted facts and general conclusions. This revision enhances the clarity and professionalism of the writing.(lines 11–39 of the manuscript)

 

 

Suggestion 5: The abstract is too long and needs to be more concise.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this constructive suggestion. In response, we have streamlined and condensed the abstract to improve clarity and conciseness. The revised version, now reflected in lines 11–39 of the manuscript, retains the core content while eliminating redundancy to better align with journal requirements.

 

Suggestion 6: Lines 43–45 and the citation of Ref. [1] are inappropriate. The statement that “2015–2025 is a decade of rapid development in Chinese agricultural modernization, and core agricultural areas have entered the stage of smart agriculture” lacks relevance and context. Please substantially revise or shorten Lines 46–52.

Response：We are grateful for the valuable suggestion made by the reviewer. As a result, we have revised the improper citation of reference [1]. Additionally, we have made modifications to lines 46 - 52 to provide more accurate and policy-related background information. The updated content focuses on the country's main strategies, such as "Document No. 1" and the "Rural Revitalization Strategy", and introduces the specific challenges and significance of agricultural modernization in Gansu Province.(see lines 47-54 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 7: Lines 65–157 are overly detailed and should be condensed to approximately 40 lines. Unlike a literature review, the purpose of the Introduction is to clearly state the scientific hypothesis behind the study.

Response：Thank you for your constructive suggestions. We have realized that the initial introduction section was overly detailed. Therefore, in order to retain the necessary background information and logical flow, and to ensure the completeness and clarity of the research background and scientific basis, we have significantly streamlined the content from lines 65 to 157 . (Please refer to lines 65 to 118 of the revised manuscript.)

 

Suggestion 8:The significance of this study could be better emphasized. In fact, it not only contributes to agricultural modernization in Gansu, but also offers valuable insights for other similar regions in China and globally

Response：We thank the reviewer for this insightful suggestion. In response, we have revised the relevant section to better highlight the broader significance of the study. The updated content emphasizes that while Gansu Province serves as the focal area, the methodology and findings of this research offer valuable insights for other regions in China and globally that share similar agricultural development conditions. This revision enhances the generalizability and academic contribution of the study.(see lines 134-138 of the manuscript).

 

Suggestion 9: Lines 189–197 and 204–220 are redundant and should be either shortened or moved to the Conclusion and Discussion section.

Response：We appreciate the reviewer’s suggestion. In response, we have revised and condensed the overly detailed content in Lines 189–197 and 204–220. The revised section (see manuscript Lines 155–179) now succinctly describes the construction of the index system and the rationale for indicator selection, emphasizing the five core dimensions and associated representative indicators. This change ensures clarity and avoids redundancy while retaining necessary methodological transparency.

Suggestion 10: Line 289: There appears to be inconsistency between Figures 1 and 2, which show that the main turning point of agricultural modernization occurred in 2018, while the author claims “The first stage was from 2013 to 2017.” Either revise the statement to “The first stage was from 2013 to 2018,” or clearly explain why the original classification remains valid.

Response：Thank you for pointing out the inconsistency. We have revised the text accordingly and changed the description of the first stage to “from 2013 to 2018” to ensure consistency with the trends shown in Figures 1 and 2 (see manuscript Line 249 and 260).

 

Suggestion 11: Line 324: The section number should be corrected from “3..1.2.” to “3.1.2.”

Response：Thank you for your careful review. We have corrected the section number from “3..1.2.” to “3.1.2.” to ensure consistency and formatting accuracy throughout the manuscript (see Line 285).

 

Suggestion 12:Please condense Lines 570–612. For example, Lines 589–592 can be removed as their meaning has already been sufficiently explained in the preceding sentence. Further streamlining is recommended throughout this section.

Response：Thank you for your valuable suggestions. In response to this, we have streamlined the content from lines 570 to 612, and removed repetitive elements. We have revised this section to make it clearer and more concise, while retaining the core analytical content (see revised version from lines 555 to 587).

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents a study on the spatial-temporal characteristics, regional differences and obstacle factors of agricultural development in Gansu, China.

Introduction: The authors presented the study background citing a number of studies showing the importance of agricultural modernization. They also showed the Chinese policy context.

Research design: In this section the authors presented the case study area and data sources. The authors also explained the construction of the evaluation index system. They also described the applied methods. In the multi-index comprehensive evaluation method, obstacle degree model and Theil index analysis method were used. The choice of methods is correct given the study objectives.

Data processing and result analysis: This section starts with an analysis of the development level of agricultural modernization in Gansu province. Then the authors analysed the subsystems present in the case study region. A very interesting and informative part of this section is fig. 3.

The study results are compelling and multifaceted. They are clearly presented and very informative. Thus, the study can serve as a very important reference point for similar studies.

L.570 – I do not think that this was the paper who selected the listed years.

Conclusions and Recommendations: These are presented in a great detail, based on the study findings and clear. I suggest adding a paragraph on the study limitations and future study pathways.

Author Response

Modification description

We sincerely thank the editor and the reviewers for their valuable feedback. We have improved the quality of the manuscript accordingly. The reviewers' comments are listed in italics, and specific issues are numbered. Our responses are given in normal font. The modifications/supplements made to the manuscript are shown in red font, and the corresponding references have been reorganized in the text.

 

Conclusions and Recommendations: These are presented in a great detail, based on the study findings and clear. I suggest adding a paragraph on the study limitations and future study pathways.

Response：We thank the reviewer for this helpful suggestion. To address the reviewer’s suggestion of adding a paragraph on study limitations and future research directions, we have added a new subsection titled “4.3 Research Expectations” at the end of the manuscript. This section explicitly discusses the limitations of this study, including constraints in sample selection and data availability, as well as the need for deeper analysis of influencing factors. Furthermore, it outlines future research pathways, particularly the need for more refined, county-level analyses and an expanded examination of systemic influences in the "three rural" domain. We believe this addition strengthens the academic rigor and completeness of the paper.(see revised manuscript Lines 677–701).