Opportunities and Constraints in the Horticultural Sector of Botswana: A SWOT Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper identifies and analyzes the major opportunities and constraints affecting Botswana's horticultural value chain based on the SWOT analysis method and relevant survey data.The manuscript is well-organized and clearly stated. I would suggest reconsider it after the following major concerns are addressed:

 

1. In the last part of the introduction, it is suggested to add the key issues to be addressed in this paper and the organization of the article structure.

2. In order to make the study more visual and easy to understand, it is recommended that a map of the study area be included in this study. The study area map can also serve as an important supplement to the research methodology and data sources, enhancing the credibility and persuasiveness of the study.

3. In section 2.1, why were these specific regions chosen as the focus of the study? Please elaborate further on their representativeness.

4. What are the advantages of using focus group discussions in section 2.2.3?

5. When the SWOT analysis is first mentioned in this study, it should be defined and explained in detail.

6.Why does a word suddenly appear after a complete sentence in line 263?

7. Does the author have relevant theoretical sources for the selection of indicators in the text? Please cite the sources.

8. In the conclusion section, the author should first summarize the research content of this paper.

9. What are the actual limitations of this study?

10. The conclusion part lacks the comparative analysis of the similarities and differences between the current research results and the existing research literature. In order to enhance the depth and breadth of the conclusions, it is suggested that a review and comparison of the existing literature be added to this section.

11. The paragraph arrangement in this paper is extremely unreasonable and lacks logical coherence. For example, what is the relationship between the second and third paragraphs in section 5? There is a lack of connection between paragraphs.

12. References are incorrectly formatted, additionally check the full text formatting, including tables try not to cross pages as well as the title error in line 454. Please check the full text carefully for similar errors!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

 

See attachment 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review: "Opportunities and Constraints Along the Horticultural Value Chain in Botswana: A SWOT Analysis".   According to the manuscript:   1) "The data collection for the study was carried out between June and August in 2023 from both the primary and secondary sources using mixed method approaches".  Authors processed the information from Survey of Primary Producers, Focus group discussion, In-depth Interviews, Desktop Review of documents. For example, a total of 900 (70%) out of 1,292 farmers planted the top five vegetables in 2021/22 across the country.    2) "Data collected through the survey was mainly analysed using descriptive measures such as frequency tables to characterise the farmers in terms of farm size, level of technology used,technical skills etc. Some of the questions from the survey were analysed using rankings as the respondents were required to rank their responses. The different items in each question were given weights and their influence on a particular issue being investigated was determined by reporting the total score (computed by multiplying the weights * frequency counts)"    3) Data was to construct the SWOT analysis of the horticultural value chain. The SWOT analysis identified three (3) key strengths, twelve (12) weaknesses, five (5) opportunities and eleven (11) threats.   4) No hyphotesis   Issues that requires improving on wording:   Point "3.1 Characterisation of producers" is usually included as a subsection of 2. Materials and Methods, because its wording content is more appropriate to the methodology than to the results section.   The lack of an introduction or statement of this subsection of point 3.3 of results makes difficult to understand the further wording and structure.   Regarding this subsection 3.3, authors must indicate what minimum wording content explains in each of the finding factors (The SWOT analysis identified three (3) key strengths, twelve (12) weaknesses, five (5) opportunities and eleven (11) threats). I mean that authors must link with the frequency and weight tables, as well as the background and/or previous studies. Otherwise, the current wording makes it impossible to understand each factor in the same terms as others. Be careful with bullets or the order of subsections.   The lack of an introduction or statement of this subsection of point 4.1  "Challenges at each stage of the value chain " makes difficult to understand the further wording and structure. Thus, Does  this subsection encompass results in 3 section?  it is likely authors must decide this wording content ( 41 and 4.2 section) as discussion section or as to expand the result section.  It is unclear 4.1 section when authors worded that "this section presents the main constraints at different stages of the value chain from input supply through to end markets". Morever,   4.2 section "identifies opportunities along the value chain which actors could sieeze and hence develop the chain". Both wording contents are not equal structured and maybe they share conjoint arguments with macro-sector level of Horticultural Value Chain in Botswana.   Again, both vocabulary and syntax need to be revised for solving serious grammatical errors. A wide range of poorly written words that are not understood. There is also a lack of well-written grammatical structures that enhance the value of the manuscript. Comments on the Quality of English Language

Both vocabulary and syntax need to be revised for solving serious grammatical errors. A wide range of poorly written words that are not understood. There is also a lack of well-written grammatical structures that enhance the value of the manuscript.

Author Response

see attached 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a well-written, interesting, methodologically sound, and important paper analysing the horticultural sector in Botswana. The findings are properly substantiated and make a real contribution to the literature.

I have a couple of remarks aiming to improve the line of arguments. First of all, I am not convinced that the term value chain should be used everywhere, including the title. The main part of the paper analyses the SWOT of the horticultural sector, and you turn to value chain analysis only in section 4. Accordingly, in the title, in first part, and in the abstract you may consider replacing value chain with sector.

Second, the introductory section is too long and not adequate. Introductions should provide a problem statement, describe the research question and methodology, and explain why the paper is new and important (what the contribution is). Instead, you get into lengthy details about the constraints that the stakeholders of the given sector face in Botswana. I would separate the introduction into two, give a proper and short introduction and include a new section about the “context”. Here you can describe or give an overview of the problems the sector is facing.

Third, I am missing some review of the literature. What is a value chain? How can governments intervene and achieve economic and social upgrading through promoting a given value chain? What is value chain participation? Consider whether the government wants to increase participation or achieve upgrading, or just protect and improve the performance of the sector in Botswana? I suggest you read: Fernandez-Stark, K., Bamber, P., & Gereffi, G. (2011). The Fruit and Vegetables Global Value Chain. Economic Upgrading and Workforce Development. Durham, NC: Duke CGGC. Enhancing agricultural value chains through technology adoption: a case study in the horticultural sector of a developing country. Agriculture & Food Security, 12(1), 45.

Author Response

see attached 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Congratulations！I have no more comments and suggest the MS accepted.