Research on the Role Mechanism and Path of Digital Technology Empowering Farmers’ Common Prosperity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Achieving common prosperity for farmers is a key goal of rural revitalization and plays a crucial role in narrowing the urban-rural divide and advancing high-quality agricultural development. This manuscript systematically investigated the impact of Digital Technology (DT) on farmers' Common Prosperity (CP), revealing its direct effects, indirect mechanisms, and nonlinear threshold effects. The paper featured a well-structured framework, rigorous methodology, and comprehensive empirical analysis. The findings provided highly significant practical and policy implications for advancing digital rural development and achieving common prosperity goals.

1、The linkage between the policies cited in the introduction and the research questions of the manuscript was not adequately articulated.

2、The theoretical analysis of how digital technologies bridging the urban-rural income gap was inadequate in "3. Theoretical Analysis and Research Hypothesis".

3、The rationale for selecting the primary and corresponding secondary indicators needed to be added in section 4.2.1.

4、The causes of regional development disparities and imbalanced digital technology infrastructure needed to be explained in "5.6. Heterogeneity test".

5、The limitations of digital technologies in advancing common prosperity among farmers needed to be discussed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The authors have proposed a multi-level mechanism of “digital technology—farmers’ income—urban-rural gap—common prosperity,” but the micro-level causal logic and contextual analysis of some mechanisms remain relatively underdeveloped. For example, the specific channels through which digital technology influences farmers’ entrepreneurship, employment, and skill improvement warrant further elaboration.
2. The theoretical innovation of this paper is noteworthy to some extent; however, the manuscript lacks a robust comparison with relevant cutting-edge literature both domestically and internationally, such as research on the digital divide and platform economies. It is recommended that the authors supplement the literature review and highlight the unique contributions and breakthroughs of the current study.
3. In the discussion of threshold effects, the policy implications of the observed nonlinear relationships are not sufficiently detailed. The authors should further clarify the economic context in which these thresholds emerge, as well as the practical implications for different regions and demographic groups.
4. It is suggested that the authors expand their discussion of future research directions, such as challenges and opportunities arising from new avenues of data acquisition, cross-national comparative studies, or the application of emerging technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence and big data platforms).
5. The policy recommendations could be further specified and made more actionable. For example, the authors might identify which aspects of digital infrastructure should be prioritized, or which types of digital services are most effective in increasing farmers’ income, thereby enhancing the practical guidance of the study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have chosen a topical research topic. The authors aim to explore how digital technologies can enhance the well-being of rural populations. The focus is on how digitalization helps increase farmers’ incomes, reduce the urban-rural income gap, and support sustainable rural development. The study also seeks to uncover the mechanisms through which technologies have direct and indirect impacts, as well as possible nonlinear effects.

The theoretical basis of the study is sufficient. The choice of research methodology is justified by the authors and is correct. A positive aspect of the study, in the reviewer's opinion, is the use of statistical data from 30 provinces in China over a period of more than ten years. Several econometric models were built: a baseline regression to assess the overall impact of technologies, a mediation model to examine whether the effects work through income growth and reduced inequality, a threshold model to see if the impact changes at different income levels or income gaps. The use of econometric modelling is also viewed positively.

In the reviewer's opinion, to improve the quality of the article, the authors should supplement paragraph 6 (Conclusion and Path) with a conclusion about the possibility of using/limitations of using the research results in other regions of the world, not only in China.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has been sufficiently revised addressing the issues raised, and the revised version meets journal requirements.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author's review response has responded to the key comments raised by the reviewers one by one. The content is generally comprehensive and targeted, and substantial revisions have been made to the corresponding chapters in the paper. This paper can be accepted.