Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the abstract, it is recommended to include the most relevant data found in the study.

Check that all figures are mentioned in the text.

In the conclusions, highlight the differences found with the data.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, you will find my corrections attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Cocoa production opportunity cost is very important for sustainability. The authors provide an in-depth analyze of this issue. However, the authors still need to make further revisions

1. In line 9“Simple Summary” is inappropriate. Abstract is necessary in this case
2. In the introduction, the author must elaborate on the relationship between opportunity cost of cocoa production and sustainable development.
3. The literature review needs to include a detailed analysis of the shortcomings of existing studies.
4. The authors should make relevant recommendations for sustainable development based on the results of the research.
5. The manuscript lacks references to sustainability articles. This will lead to risk beyond the scope of the journal

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, please find attached our inputs and answers to your questions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review comments:

This article investigates the cost of cocoa production in Cote d'Ivoire, particularly considering the impact of opportunity costs. A study investigated 228 farmers from three different ecological regions and found that household labor is the main component of cocoa production costs. If opportunity cost is taken into account, about 38% of farmers produce at a loss. Research has shown that farmers in new production areas work longer hours than those in old production areas, and agroforestry systems are more labor-saving than full day systems. The article emphasizes that when evaluating production costs and setting cocoa prices, opportunity costs must be considered to ensure that farmers receive fair compensation and maintain the sustainability of cocoa production. In addition, the study highlights the potential of agroforestry systems in optimizing cocoa production efficiency, as it can reduce the demand for labor.The research idea of the article is clear, the data and materials are reliable, the discussion is sufficient, and has certain social application value. The specific modification opinions are as follows:

1. There is no text after the abstract, and the simple summary should be replaced with an abstract.
2. Can the analysis cases of farmers from Ningxia and Spain mentioned in the literature review be applied to cocoa cultivation in Ivory Coast, West Africa?
3. Is there any feasibility basis for the two hypotheses proposed in the literature review? If so, please provide explanations.
4. The general formula of methodology does not introduce the name and terminology of the methodology at the beginning. It is recommended to summarize it.
5. It is recommended to fill, enrich, or remove the text at the beginning of Section 4.
6. The Kruskal Wallis part in Figure 2 overlaps with the part in the figure. It is recommended to remove it and place it outside the figure.
7. The numbers in the first image on the left in Figure 5 have a lot of overlap. It is recommended to use a different representation.
8. What is the significance of AuthorContributions and the following lines of text in Chapter 6's summary?

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, please find attached our inputs and answers to your questions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been meticulously revised. I recommend acceptance in present form.