Small-Scale Farming in the United States: Challenges and Pathways to Enhanced Productivity and Profitability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Manuscript «Small-scale farming in the United States: challenges and path-ways to enhanced productivity and profitability»

 

The manuscript is within the scope of the Journal. This manuscript provides a comprehensive and insightful exploration of the multifaceted issues surrounding small-scale farms in the United States. It thoroughly examines the characteristics of these farms and highlights their vital roles within local communities, emphasizing both their economic and social significance. What makes this manuscript particularly valuable is its in-depth analysis of the wide range of challenges that small-scale farmers face today – from social and gender-related issues to economic difficulties, environmental uncertainties caused by climate change, and technological barriers. Moreover, the discussion extends to important contemporary topics such as the rise of local food movements, the importance of social capital, and the growing demand for healthy, locally produced food. The manuscript also touches on innovative solutions like urban and peri-urban agriculture, as well as practical considerations such as food safety regulations, product labeling, and the development of agrotourism. It also explores the potential benefits of forming cooperatives and outlines government support schemes that could help small-scale farms thrive. These suggestions are timely and relevant, offering a roadmap for supporting these essential contributors to the U.S. food system.

Overall, the manuscript is thoroughly developed, clearly written, and provides a balanced perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing small-scale agriculture. In addition, the manuscript provides an extensive review of the literature. It is an excellent resource for policymakers, researchers, and anyone interested in sustainable food systems and rural development.

In order to improve the manuscript, I suggest the following corrections:

1. The manuscript in the Introduction section contains a fragment: «The Materials and Methods should be described with sufficient details to allow others to replicate and build on the published results. Please note that the publication of your manuscript implicates that you must make all materials, data, computer code, and protocols associated with the publication available to readers. Please disclose at the submission stage any restrictions on the availability of materials or information. New methods and protocols should be described in detail while well-established methods can be briefly described and appropriately cited». These are the requirements for sections of the manuscript that must be removed from the text.

2. There is no reference to Figure 1 or explanation for it in the text of the manuscript.

3. It would make sense to give attention to organic farming.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript is well written and infomative. Only a few sentence need modification, please see the attached review version for reference. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article addresses an interesting and topical issue. The challenges faced by small farmers are generally the same in all countries, but solutions to overcome them differ significantly. I went through the article carefully and liked the fact that it addresses the subject of the challenges in an exhaustive manner.

There is no section on materials and methods. I believe that we must respect a number of methodological aspects, such as PRISMA, even within review articles. Using established guidelines and highlighting the methodology will provide the article with clarity, credibility, and transparency.

It would also be important to specify how many of the studies used come from a case study and how many from review articles.

1. Introduction

The introduction clearly presents the importance of small farms.

There is a fragment between lines 55 and 62 that I do not understand what is going on with. I suggest that it be removed.

Figure 1 is not linked to a paragraph of the text; it would be advisable to explain the aspects in the figure a little in the text.

2. Challenges facing small-scale farms in the U.S.

Although it is quite fragmented, I appreciate this subchapter from the perspective of clarity and good coverage of the research topic.

There are several references, such as 43, 49, and 55, which present studies from other geographical areas than those studied. What is the purpose of introducing them? Do you think that these studies reveal features similar to those of the area being studied? If you are discussing the challenges faced by small businesses in the US, it would be advisable to rely on studies that focus on the same geographical area you have selected.

3. Pathways for enhancing productivity and profitability

In line 424, you present a series of percentages, the last one being from 2024, when the source used is from 2022. Please correct it.

The subchapter concludes with Figure 4, which, although detailed later in subchapter 4, has no paragraph describing it.

Are there data on the annual budgets of the mentioned programs and the degree of access?

4. Implications for application, policy formulation, research, and extension

I have no observations.

5. Conclusion

It would be advisable to mention the future directions/uses of the presented study and its limitations.

Bibliography

The articles are generally up-to-date, the vast majority of them relevant to the objectives of the study.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an interesting review that provides relevant information about small farm activities and potential improvements. While I like the article, some aspects need attention. They are listed as follows.

Section 1: Introduction

1. Line 41: Please check the figures of small farms in the examples. Some sources suggest that the figures of hectares may be wrong. For example, I am not so convinced that the definition of a small farm in Hungary is less than 200 ha. I think this definition is for small-family farms, and not for small farms themselves (I think they are up to 10 ha). Please see this information in the following link: https://www.fao.org/family-farming/countries/hun/en/
2. Line 47: Related to my previous point, there are indicators that show the economic contribution of small farms globally. Please check if these figures correspond to small farms. Small-family farms or both.
3. Lines 55-62: This paragraph is out of context. It appears that the authors forgot to delete it. Please clarify.

Section 2: Challenges facing small-scale farms in the U.S.

4. Line 139: Please explain how the listed challenges were defined and selected.
5. The list of challenges is appealing. However, socio-psychological aspects have been omitted. For example, lack of motivation, unwillingness to go against the decision made by other farmers, etc. I think a brief discussion of these factors should be added. The authors can consult several articles that link small farmers with socio-psychological considerations using the theory of planned behaviour. I found one that may be useful: Senger et al. (2027). Using the theory of planned behavior to understand the intention of small farmers in diversifying their agricultural production. Journal of Rural Studies 49: 32-40.

Section 3: Pathways for enhancing productivity and profitability

6. Please add an introduction to this section explaining what path will be explored and the rationale for this.

Section 4: Implications for application, policy formulation, research, and extension

7. I think the ideas and implications discussed in this section are interesting. My only concern is that these ideas are based on previous studies and personal assessment, without any statistical analysis to check whether they can indeed affect productivity. Obviously, the proposed ideas could be developed in future research. This has to be acknowledged.

Section 5: Conclusions

8. Please add the limitations of the research and ideas for future research at the end of the conclusions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although it does not approach a methodology dedicated to review articles, I greatly appreciated the fact that it approaches the subject in an exhaustive manner. It is also appreciated that a descriptive paragraph has been included at the beginning of each main chapter.
I believe that the article is valuable and presents a series of pertinent and relevant proposals for American farmers and the competent institutions.