Exploring the Determinants of the Relationships between the Land-Based Sectors with the Wider Rural Business Base in Scotland: An Empirical Analysis

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The premise for the manuscript seems suitable for the Land and is of potential interest to the readers of the journal. I would like to thank the authors for the opportunity to read their research that analyzed the importance of the connections with land-based industries on rural businesses, as a Scotland case study. I think that the paper provides fresh outcomes, it is well-structured and coherent. However, there are a couple of shortcomings that need to be resolved: 

1. Introduction: This section skips a detailed explanation of the study’s objective(s). The main limitation of the proposed research is the lack of the theoretical conceptualization of the study and the fact that conducted research provides only a limited contribution to the existing knowledge on connections between non-land-based industries and land-based sectors. Even by indicating the intention to fill mentioned research gaps by examining the key determinants of the connections between rural businesses and the relationship with land-based sectors, there is still no clear picture of the projected research aim. Future readers need to recognize the clear goal of the manuscript in order to follow the research findings and accompanying conclusions. 

2. Literature review: Good but presenting more cases from other parts of the UK and from abroad would be beneficial. Otherwise, the lack of references in this section is quite noticeable.

3. Data Collection and Descriptive Statistics: First of all, this section should be within the Methodology and not a separate part. Most importantly, the clarification of the beginning of the first sentence is highly essential: “We conducted a telephone survey called Rural Business Survey (RBS) in 2020, which is mainly focused on businesses…” (Lines 193-194). What does it mean? Who named the survey “Rural Business Survey (RBS)”? Did authors do that and based on what? Where could future readers find more details about the precise questions in the survey? Is there any reference supporting this model/approach? This is not clear at this stage.

4. Methods and Analytical Framework also need improvements. The authors should explain the research procedure and (especially) the research instrument in more detail. 

5. Empirical Results and Discussion: This part of the study is very well-articulated, considering the quantitative research approach to this topic. The outcomes are interesting and essential for the study.

6. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations: Generally good but the proper clarification is partly omitted. This section should be enhanced with more future guidelines which will provide a more valuable contribution to the existing knowledge. It is really necessary to shed more light on the scientific significance of the paper, which isn’t clear at this stage. Also, potential limitations of the research and proposal for future research are also overlooked.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the thoughtful review of our manuscript (Land-2190716) entitled “Exploring the determinants of the relationships between the land-based sectors with the wider rural business base in Scotland: An empirical analysis”. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments. You have greatly helped reshape this into a much better paper.

We have conducted a thorough revision of the manuscript and considered the feedback received from all reviewers. We have incorporated international studies into the literature review and provided a more clear and comprehensive picture of our research aims and contributions, including theoretical contributions and implications. In addition, we have highlighted some promising avenues for future research. We have provided a point-by-point response to the reviewer's comments below and have also attached all responses to comments via the online submission system (Please see the attachment).

Thank you for considering the revised version of our manuscript. We look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely,

The authors

Reviewer 1:

1. Introduction: This section skips a detailed explanation of the study’s objective(s). The main limitation of the proposed research is the lack of the theoretical conceptualization of the study and the fact that conducted research provides only a limited contribution to the existing knowledge on connections between non-land-based industries and land-based sectors. Even by indicating the intention to fill mentioned research gaps by examining the key determinants of the connections between rural businesses and the relationship with land-based sectors, there is still no clear picture of the projected research aim. Future readers need to recognize the clear goal of the manuscript in order to follow the research findings and accompanying conclusions. 

Response: Thank you very much for your constructive feedback. We have now added the main objectives of this study in Section 1 on Pages 3, Lines 91-96.

“Therefore, the objectives of this study are to:

1) examine the key determinants of the relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors (i.e., farming, forestry and landed estate) in rural Scotland.

2) explore the differences in business performance, future plans and challenges of non-land-based rural businesses that have the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural classifications.”

We have also provided our theoretical framework including international literature in Section 2 on Pages 4-5, Lines 132-187. We have also provided a theoretical contribution and research implications in Section 6 Page 23, Lines 769-787.

“This empirical evidence also provides key implications for practice since our evidence-based analysis can help business owners and managers, particularly non-land-based rural businesses to understand the key determinants and challenges of the relationships between their businesses and land-based sectors to improve their business growth and future plans. In particular, the key findings highlight key business constraints such as cash flow, digital connectivity, access to government services and access to government financial support as their major challenges for the relationships with land-based sectors. Moreover, this paper also provides a theoretical contribution to research that focuses on businesses outside land-based sectors. We apply the notion of rural economic development, rural-urban linkage and value chain perspectives to understand the multifaceted connections between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors, particularly in rural areas. Through the lenses of these theoretical perspectives, we can understand the importance of diversification in rural areas through the development of a diverse range of industries and businesses and the dynamics of supply chains in different actors and geographical locations. Therefore, by understanding these theoretical frameworks, policymakers and practitioners as well as academic researchers can help develop more effective strategies and policies to pro-mote the economic well-being of rural communities and enhance the relationships be-tween land-based and non-land-based businesses in rural areas.”

We have also provided some research directions for future studies in Section 7 on Pages 23-24, Lines 788-809.

“This study highlights some avenues for further research. Firstly, given the main focus of this study on the quantitative analysis, interviewing management-level personnel is recommended to gain deeper understandings of business support and needs among non-land-based rural businesses for business growth and economic development in rural areas. Secondly, future research should also consider the impact of un-certainties of new agricultural support payments (e.g. Agriculture Bills) on non-land-based rural businesses since our survey was conducted in relation to CAP and before the introduction of new agricultural support payments. Also, it would be interesting for future research to further explore the challenges and opportunities in women-led businesses since our result reveal that women-led businesses are less likely to have a connection to the estate sector. Next, it is important to note that the scope of this study is limited to three land-based sectors. As such, future research could further explore the relationship between forested land and protected areas, given that many of Scot-land’s substantial system of protected areas encompass significant forest lands, which can provide valuable ecosystem services when managed for conservation. Such re-search would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the economic benefits of conservation practices in Scotland. Furthermore, it would be interesting for future research to examine the effects of COVID-19 crisis on businesses outside land-based sectors in rural areas during the crisis and aftermath. Finally, due to data limitation, future research would benefit from a longitudinal data analysis to better under-stand the connections to the land-based sectors among non-land-based rural business-es overtime.”

2. Literature review: Good but presenting more cases from other parts of the UK and from abroad would be beneficial. Otherwise, the lack of references in this section is quite noticeable.

Response: Thank you. We have now added some international literature to this revised manuscript in Section 2 Theoretical perspectives and Section 3 Literature review as well as Section 1 Introduction. However, these international studies mainly focus on the contributions of land-based sectors to rural business and rural communities. We only found a few studies that have directly explored the determinants of the relationships between non- and land-based businesses in rural areas, which Raley and Moxey (2002) (England) and Thomson et al., 2018 (Scotland).

Some international literature in Section 1 on Page 3, Lines 80-87:

“For example, Haggblade et al. (1989) reveal that non-farm income can help stimulate farm investments and improve agricultural productivity in rural areas in Sub-Sahara Africa. Hazell and Hojjati (1995) point out that a combination of agricultural and non-agricultural activities can drive rural economies since non-farm activities can be an important source of income and employment for farmers and rural populations in Zambia. Artz et al. (2000) also identify the positive impact of livestock processing industry (e.g. meat packaging) on employment growth in rural areas in the US. Using the local case studies in England, Short et al. (2008) report that farm diversification that incorporates non-land-based businesses, such as tourism, can create new job opportunities in rural areas.”

The theoretical perspectives in Section 2 on Pages 3-4, Lines 132-187.

Some international literature in Section 3 on Page 6, Lines 229-243:

“Some have identified key factors that influence the linkages between land-based sectors and rural firms. For example, Courtney and Errington (2000) identified that business sectors, economic activities, technology, business size and age of businesses are key factors that influence the association between land-based sectors and rural areas in England. Shackleton et al. (2001) also examined the contribution of land-based activities to rural livelihoods in South Africa. They found that land-based sectors (e.g. agriculture, forestry and other related sectors) play an important role in rural livelihoods both financially and socially and in the diverse range of livelihood strategies adopted by rural households. Using the case studies from rural communities in England, Short et al. (2008) found that the relationship between rural communities and land-based sectors differ significantly depending on various factors, such as the nature of local land-based industries, local social norms, and the association between demand and supply for local products. In addition, Wilmsen (2018) examines the effect of land-based resettlement on rural livelihoods in China and he reports that access to farmland and non-farm jobs are the important determinant of household income”.

3. Data Collection and Descriptive Statistics: First of all, this section should be within the Methodology and not a separate part. Most importantly, the clarification of the beginning of the first sentence is highly essential: “We conducted a telephone survey called Rural Business Survey (RBS) in 2020, which is mainly focused on businesses…” (Lines 193-194). What does it mean? Who named the survey “Rural Business Survey (RBS)”? Did authors do that and based on what? Where could future readers find more details about the precise questions in the survey? Is there any reference supporting this model/approach? This is not clear at this stage.

Response: Apologies for this unclear information about the RBS. We have now deleted it and replaced it with the term “survey” thought the paper (see Page 7, Lines 280-286).

“In this study, a total of 1,500 businesses were interviewed by Pexel Research Services through a telephone survey in 2020 using a quota sampling technique, which is a non-probability sampling method. This technique involves selecting a sample based on pre-specified quotas or proportions for a predetermined number or population units. It allows for a more diverse sample and greater control over the sample selection process. This is particularly useful for our study as there is limited information about the business units in some locations. This survey mainly focused on businesses in four Scottish regions; Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway, the Scottish Borders and Tayside since these regions were predicted to have been most adversely affected by the CAP reforms (Thomson et al., 2018).”

We have now combined this section with the method section and renamed this section as “Section 4 Data and Methodology” on Page 7, which includes 4.1 Data collection and Descriptive Statistics (Pages 7-11, Lines 279-341), 4.2 Empirical Analysis (Pages 11-12, Lines 342-380), 4.3 Dependent Variables (Page 12, Lines 381-412) and 4.4 Independent Variables (Pages 12-13, Lines 413-449).

4. Methods and Analytical Framework also need improvements. The authors should explain the research procedure and (especially) the research instrument in more detail. 

Response: We have now combined this section with the data section. Also, we have explained the analytical framework of this study based on the objectives in Section 4.2 Empirical Analysis on Pages 11-12, Lines 342-380. We have also provided more information on the dependent and independent variables used in the analysis in Section 4.3 Dependent variables and Section 4.4 Independent Variables.

Section 4.3 Dependent variables on Page 12, Lines 381-412.

“In Table 1, based on the theoretical background, non-land-based businesses in rural areas are significantly associated with land-based sectors, since non-land-based businesses can provide important sources of employment and income diversification in rural areas, while creating higher demand for goods and services produced by farming and forestry sectors. This relationship can be influenced by different factors and geographical locations. Therefore, in this analysis, we aim to explore the key determinants of the relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors in rural areas. Specifically, we analyse the relationships between wider rural businesses and each land-based sector, including farming, forestry, and landed estate, which are a binary dependent variable in Equations (1) and (2). The binary variable indicates whether businesses reported having any direct or indirect relationship with land-based sectors in a survey. 

For the analysis, we also consider the importance of the relationships with land-based sectors among rural businesses in different rural classifications in Scotland. We analyse the differences in the business performance in terms of annual turnover and turnover changes, which are a categorical variable (see Table 4 and 5). We also consider the comparative analysis of future plans for the next five years among non-land-based businesses that have the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural locations. In Table 6, the future plans include investing in land/building, machinery, digital equipment, office equipment, and staff recruitment/skills. Businesses were asked whether they plan to invest in these plans or not, which are a binary variable. Finally, we consider the differences in business challenges related to Brexit such as imports, exports, business regulations, access to seasonal labour, and so on (see Table 7, 8 and 9) between non-land-based businesses that have the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural classifications. Previous studies show that Brexit could potentially add pressure on the UK economy due to labour shortages, UK-EU trade barriers, and supply chain disruption (Shucksmith, 2019; Billing et al., 2021; Tiwasing, 2021). However, some studies suggest that Brixit could provide opportunities for the UK to expand its global trade and create its own regulatory framework (Billing et al., 2021). Thus, businesses that are willing and able to adapt to these changes may find Brexit as an opportunity. In the survey, firms were asked whether they see these challenges related to Brexit as a challenge, an opportunity or both for their businesses, which are a categorical variable.”

Section 4.4 Independent Variables on Pages 12-13, Lines 413-449.

“For Equation (1) and (2), the analysis considers three main determinants that can potentially impact the relationships between land-based sectors and non-land-based rural businesses: business characteristics, business challenges and business capability. Firstly, for business characteristics, the analysis controls for business sectors since non-land-based rural businesses can run their businesses in different sectors such as manufacturing, wholesale and/or retail, and so on. Additionally, business size is controlled in the analysis, which is classified into small, medium and large businesses based on the number of employees, with micro businesses being the default in the model. Regions and other geographical locations such as rural areas and small towns are con-trolled in the model since they can influence the connection with land-based sectors (Thomson et al., 2018). In particular, we include the information on businesses located in Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway, and the Scottish Borders, with Tayside being the default in the model, which is a dummy variable, since our survey was collect-ed from four regions. Gender is included in the analysis since women-led businesses are traditionally less likely to work in land-based sectors than men-led businesses (Ra-ley and Moxey, 2000). Business age matters for the relationships with land-based sectors (Thomson et al., 2018) since older businesses in rural areas are more likely to operate in agricultural and farming sectors (Phillipson et al, 2019). Therefore, we also control for business age in the analysis. Finally, family businesses are controlled for type of businesses in the analysis since rural areas are predominantly family businesses (Tiwasing et al., 2022).

Furthermore, we consider the impacts of businesses challenges/constraints on the connection between land-based sectors and non-land-based rural businesses. The key business constraints considered in this analysis include recruiting skilled staff, access to staff training, access business advice, government financial support, cash flow, digital connectivity, access to appropriate suppliers, access to new markets, and customer engagement, since these variables can potentially influence the relationships with land-based sectors among non-land-based businesses in rural areas (Raley and Moxey, 2000; Thomson et al., 2018). For business capacity, digital technology and online platforms are crucial for business development in rural areas in the digital era (Tiwasing, 2021). Therefore, online sales activities and the use of social media are included in the analysis as these variables can influence the relationships between land-based sectors and non-land-based businesses. Also, the analysis controls for the ability to export and import since non-land-based businesses are found to be involved in internationalisation as part of agri-food supply chain in rural Scotland (Thomson et al., 2018). Phillipson et al. (2019) also support that businesses in rural England tend to report having goods and/or services that are suitable for exporting.”

5. Empirical Results and Discussion: This part of the study is very well-articulated, considering the quantitative research approach to this topic. The outcomes are interesting and essential for the study.

Response: Thank you very much.

6. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations: Generally good but the proper clarification is partly omitted. This section should be enhanced with more future guidelines which will provide a more valuable contribution to the existing knowledge. It is really necessary to shed more light on the scientific significance of the paper, which isn’t clear at this stage. Also, potential limitations of the research and proposal for future research are also overlooked.

Response: We have now revised the conclusion section and highlighted the key findings of this study on Pages 21-23, Lines 689-787.

We have also provided key policy recommendations related to some of these findings on Pages 22-23, Lines 736-763.

“Our empirical evidence also highlights some policy recommendations. Firstly, digital connectivity and digital infrastructure improvement are urgently needed for non-land-based businesses not only in remote rural areas, but also in small towns, particularly for those who rely on digital platforms for their online business services. However, to sustainably overcome the digital disadvantages in rural areas and under-served areas, government and business support should not only focus on digital in-vestment, but also target digital skills development and promoting the uptake of digital services for the specific needs of each rural area (Tiwasing, 2021; Tiwasing et al., 2022). In particular, digital training and IT support programme (e.g., rural digital hubs) should be available for these businesses in rural areas to help improve their digital skills (Merrell et al., 2022), since several government services have now moved to online platforms (Tiwasing et al., 2022). Secondly, cash flow is seen as a major concern for non-land-based rural businesses having relationships with farming, forestry and landed estate sectors. This emphasises improved communication and collaboration be-tween suppliers, financial agencies (e.g., banks) and non-land-based businesses to focus on the immediate needs to help with budgeting and managing payments and re-payments. Also, timely distribution of payments to non-land-based businesses having relationships with agricultural, forestry and landed estate sectors and their supply chains with clear communication of projected timescales should not only help ease cash flow difficulties, but also boost morale in these sectors in rural areas (The Prince’s Countryside Fund, 2016). This result could highlight a key urgent action for future Scottish policies related to land-based sectors and rural economy such as the Agriculture Bills, National Strategy for Economic Transformation, etc. Finally, the impacts of Brexit are reported as business challenges for non-land-based business in different rural classifications, especially access to seasonal and regular labour and business regulations. Brexit rules apply to things like travel, immigration, and trading with EU businesses. Therefore, the Scottish Government should provide tools and services to guide non-land-based businesses in rural areas to help understand and comply with laws and regulations arising from Brexit. In particular, non-land-based businesses are likely to rely on EU labour for both regular and seasonal labour, particularly in accessible rural areas. Therefore, the government should reconsider the restrictions to recruit key skilled workers from EU for both short-term and long-term workers and should also provide long-term investments in skills training for Scottish and UK labour to cope with extra demand from these industries (Tiwasing, 2021).”

We have also provided a theoretical contribution and practical implication in Section 6 on Page 23, Lines 769-787.

“This empirical evidence also provides key implications for practice since our evidence-based analysis can help business owners and managers, particularly non-land-based rural businesses to understand the key determinants and challenges of the relationships between their businesses and land-based sectors to improve their business growth and future plans. In particular, the key findings highlight key business constraints such as cash flow, digital connectivity, access to government services and access to government financial support as their major challenges for the relationships with land-based sectors. Moreover, this paper also provides a theoretical contribution to research that focuses on businesses outside land-based sectors. We apply the notion of rural economic development, rural-urban linkage and value chain perspectives to understand the multifaceted connections between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors, particularly in rural areas. Through the lenses of these theoretical perspectives, we can understand the importance of diversification in rural areas through the development of a diverse range of industries and businesses and the dynamics of supply chains in different actors and geographical locations. Therefore, by understanding these theoretical frameworks, policymakers and practitioners as well as academic researchers can help develop more effective strategies and policies to pro-mote the economic well-being of rural communities and enhance the relationships be-tween land-based and non-land-based businesses in rural areas.”

Moreover, we have also highlighted some avenues for future research in Section 7 Limitations and future research directions on Pages 23-24, Lines 788-809.

“This study highlights some avenues for further research. Firstly, given the main focus of this study on the quantitative analysis, interviewing management-level personnel is recommended to gain deeper understandings of business support and needs among non-land-based rural businesses for business growth and economic development in rural areas. Secondly, future research should also consider the impact of uncertainties of new agricultural support payments (e.g. Agriculture Bills) on non-land-based rural businesses since our survey was conducted in relation to CAP and before the introduction of new agricultural support payments. Also, it would be interesting for future research to further explore the challenges and opportunities in women-led businesses since our result reveal that women-led businesses are less likely to have a connection to the estate sector. Next, it is important to note that the scope of this study is limited to three land-based sectors. As such, future research could further explore the relationship between forested land and protected areas, given that many of Scot-land’s substantial system of protected areas encompass significant forest lands, which can provide valuable ecosystem services when managed for conservation. Such research would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the economic benefits of conservation practices in Scotland. Furthermore, it would be interesting for future research to examine the effects of COVID-19 crisis on businesses outside land-based sectors in rural areas during the crisis and aftermath. Finally, due to data limitation, future research would benefit from a longitudinal data analysis to better under-stand the connections to the land-based sectors among non-land-based rural businesses overtime.” 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

（1）It is suggested to revise the abstract of the paper. Show the main research results in the paper.

（2）Please add how to select 1500 samples and which sampling method to use.

（3）The chart format needs to be adjusted. Please use a three-line table.

（4）in Table 1. Descriptive Statistics，some sample sizes are different, some are 1500, and some are other numbers. Please explain why the sample sizes for statistical description are different.

（5） It is suggested to delete the% in the figures in Table 2，3, 4,5,6.for example, 70.96%, 76.03% and 70.25%.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the thoughtful review of our manuscript (Land-2190716) entitled “Exploring the determinants of the relationships between the land-based sectors with the wider rural business base in Scotland: An empirical analysis”. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments. You have greatly helped reshape this into a much better paper.

We have conducted a thorough revision of the manuscript and considered the feedback received from all reviewers. We have incorporated international studies into the literature review and provided a more clear and comprehensive picture of our research aims and contributions, including theoretical contributions and implications. In addition, we have highlighted some promising avenues for future research. We have provided a point-by-point response to the reviewer's comments below and have also attached all responses to comments via the online submission system (Please see the attachment).

Thank you for considering the revised version of our manuscript. We look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely,

The authors

Reviewer 2

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

(1) It is suggested to revise the abstract of the paper. Show the main research results in the paper.

Response: We have now highlighted the key findings in the abstract on Page 1, Lines 19-31.

“Using a survey of 1,500 businesses whose primary focus is not agriculture, forestry or landed estate in four Scottish regions, the key findings of Logit Model reveal that businesses located in rural areas are more likely to have the relationships, both direct (supplying or purchasing goods/services) and indirect relationships with farming, forestry and landed estate sectors than urban counterparts. Focusing on rural businesses, the results show that business size, sectors, business age, exporting, importing, and business constraints related to cash flow, digital connectivity, and government financial support significantly influence the relationships with land-based sectors. The results of Crosstab Analysis also reveal differences in business performance, business challenges related to Brexit and future plans between non-land-based rural businesses having the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural classifications: accessible/remote small towns, accessible rural areas, and remote rural areas. The paper concludes with policy recommendations to support rural businesses and future land-based and non-land-based sectors in rural Scotland.”

(2）Please add how to select 1500 samples and which sampling method to use.

Response: We conducted the questionnaire and used the service from the market research company called “Pexel Research Services” to ensure that we have the appropriate number of observations from 4 regions. We have explained a sampling method used by Pexel Research Services in Section 4.1 on Page 7, Line 280-286.

“In this study, a total of 1,500 businesses were interviewed by Pexel Research Services through a telephone survey in 2020 using a quota sampling technique, which is a non-probability sampling method. This technique involves selecting a sample based on prespecified quotas or proportions for a predetermined number or population units. It allows for a more diverse sample and greater control over the sample selection process. This is particularly useful for our study as there is limited information about the business units in some locations.”

(3）The chart format needs to be adjusted. Please use a three-line table.

Response: All tables are now adjusted to a three-line table.

(4）in Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, some sample sizes are different, some are 1500, and some are other numbers. Please explain why the sample sizes for statistical description are different.

Response: We have explained this point in Section 4.1 under the Table 1 Descriptive Statistics on Page 11, Lines 340-341.

“Note: the total number of observations for each variable is different because not all businesses answered to all questions in the survey”.

(5） It is suggested to delete the% in the figures in Table 2，3, 4,5,6.for example, 70.96%, 76.03% and 70.25%.

Response: We have now deleted % in Table 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 and make sure that all tables are in the same format.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

see my detailed comments sent directly to Lewine.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for the thoughtful review of our manuscript (Land-2190716) entitled “Exploring the determinants of the relationships between the land-based sectors with the wider rural business base in Scotland: An empirical analysis”. We would also like to thank the reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments. You have greatly helped reshape this into a much better paper.

We have conducted a thorough revision of the manuscript and considered the feedback received from all reviewers. We have incorporated international studies into the literature review and provided a more clear and comprehensive picture of our research aims and contributions, including theoretical contributions and implications. In addition, we have highlighted some promising avenues for future research. We have provided a point-by-point response to the reviewer's comments below and have also attached all responses to comments via the online submission system (Please see the attachment).

Thank you for considering the revised version of our manuscript. We look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely,

The authors

Reviewer 3

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

see my detailed comments sent directly to Lewine.

For this one, after a full review, I recommend rejection and referral to a relevant European journal., not least because the research was funded by Scottish government sources This article does not seem suitable for the editorial objectives of Land. Here are my detailed comments for your consideration

1. This ms will be meaningful to those working in Scotland, but may be a little difficult for others to understand. It does not distinguish between “industries” and “businesses”. International readers may not understand what is a “landed estate” (e.g., line 20). What is “the estate sector” eg. Line 47, and what is its contribution to Scotland’s economy? What are “landed estate businesses” (l. 83). The phrase “non-land-based businesses” is an awkward formulation that is used throughout. At least, some examples should be provided the first time the phrase is used. Better, find a more appropriate word to describe these, perhaps something like “service-based businesses.”

Response: To avoid confusion between industries and businesses, we have replaced the word “industry” with “sector” for all land-based sectors throughout this paper.

The meanings of landed estate and estate sectors are the same in this paper. We have, therefore, used the “landed estate” sector throughout the paper. Also, we have provided this explanation in Section 4.1 on Page 7, Lines 293-298.

“In particular, a landed estate is typically a holding of hundreds, or thousands of acres of land owned by or for a family over the generations and can comprise of a wide range of businesses activities and assets such as traditional sporting estates (where hunting, shooting, fishing the main focus of activity), renting of land/building or mixed-enterprise estate that includes a mix of farming, sporting, forestry and other ventures.”

On Page 7, Lines 298-303, we have also provided the contributions of the landed estate sector to Scottish economy.

“In Scotland, the landed estate sector has a long history and has played a significant role in shaping the country's landscape and economy (BiGGAR Economics, 2023). According to the report of BiGGAR Economics (2023), many landed estates in Scotland have significant forestry holdings, such as Aboyne Estate in Aberdeenshire, which contribute £2.4 billion GVA per year to the Scottish economy. Some landed estates are also involved in tourism and hospitality, offering accommodations and outdoor activities for visitors (Forestry Commission, 2020).”

Thank you for your suggestion on presenting the “non-land-based businesses” term earlier in this paper. We have now introduced this term in Abstract and in Section 1 Introduction on Page 2-3, Lines 72-74, and we have also explained the reason why we use this term in our paper in the Footnote 1 on Page 3.

“However, it is still unclear how the Bill can support businesses outside land-based sectors, called ‘non-land-based businesses¹’ and their future in rural areas.”

“¹In line with the Commission for Rural Communities (2013) and Thomson et al. (2018), this study adopts the term 'non-land-based businesses' to refer to businesses that are not in the land-based sectors, since the observations in this study include businesses providing services, as well as those engaged in manufacturing or other types of production.”

2. The word “linkages” is incorrectly used. “Links” would be the correct term, and should replace “linkages” throughout.

Response: We have now changed the term “linkage” to “relationship” in our result and discussion sections. However, we still keep the word “linkage” in the theoretical background section since we have used the rural-urban linkage as one of our theoretical lenses following Tacoli (2015) and Tacoli and Vorley (2015). 

3. Line 37, the three main parts of Scotland needs a map, and perhaps a brief explanation of why “Highlands and Islands” is one of three “main parts”, equivalent to Southern Uplands (so, not “highlands”?) and Central Lowlands.

 Response: We have added this Scottish map on Page 2. We have also deleted “Islands” from the sentence on Page 1, Lines 37-38. 

“Scotland has a most remarkable diversity of landscape which is traditionally divided into three main parts, the Highlands, Southern uplands, and Central lowlands, lying between the first two areas”. 

4. Why is agriculture considered an “industry” (l. 41 and throughout)? Industrial agriculture may apply to some parts of the agricultural lands of Scotland, but other parts are mixed farming and not really producing at an industrial level. Some lands may be managed for both crops and forest products.

Response: Thank you for your suggestion. We have now replaced the “industry” with “sector” for all land-based sectors throughout the paper.

5. The ms seems to be surprised that Scotland’s private sector outside of farms and forests typically work closely with these land-based enterprises, but of course this is to be expected. To be successful, private sector needs to identify the demand for the foods and services being providing, and the potential demand for these. So of course they are looking to agriculture and forests for business opportunities. But in l. 126 it reports that 70,000 businesses in the rural landscape created 450,000 jobs and contributed 54 billion GBP to the economy. And by l. 301-303, the ms finally gets around to the Thomson et al. (2028) report on the diversity of Scotland’s rural economy, which this ms further supports though its support would be more clear if it used the more accurate plural “relationships"

Response: The main objectives of this study are to identify the key determinants of the relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors in rural Scotland and to examine differences in business performance, future plans and business challenges between non-land-based businesses having the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural locations. This study is not merely examining whether non-land-based businesses work closely with land-based sectors or not.

We have added the key objectives of this study to Section 1 on Page 3 Lines 91-96:

“Therefore, the objectives of this study are to:

1) examine the key determinants of the relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors (i.e., farming, forestry and estates) in rural Scotland.

2) explore the differences in business performance, future plans and challenges of non-land-based rural businesses that have the relationships with land-based sectors in different rural classifications.”

We are not surprised that businesses outside these land-based sectors in rural areas often work closely with businesses in land-based sectors. We totally agree with your suggestions. In Section 2 on Pages 4-5, Lines 132-187, we have provided the theoretical background to support the strong connections between land-based sectors and non-land-based businesses.

However, we are surprised that policy and research have overlooked businesses outside these land-based sectors, despite their importance to the rural and Scottish economies. For example, farmers receive direct payment. However, businesses that do not own their land and/or work outside land-based sectors cannot receive this income support, even though they are important to the rural and Scottish economies. These businesses are a key part of the agri-food supply chain and cannot be ignored. They also require support. In addition, few papers explore the determinants of relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors.

Regarding the comments I. 126 and I. 301-303, the number of businesses in rural areas includes both non-land and land-based businesses. These businesses contribute to income generation and job creation. Also, there is growing recognition of the importance of non-land-based businesses in rural economies such as food and drink, tourism, etc. Despite the importance of non-land-based businesses in rural areas, there is a lack of data and information about them, both for us and for the government. We received funding from the Scottish Government to collect data on non-land-based rural businesses and produce evidence-based analysis for policy recommendations. We have explained these issues in Section 1 on Page 2-3, Line 57-91:

“Also, previous and recent policies (e.g., Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), etc.) have mainly concentrated on the economic contributions of land-based businesses and their activities. The CAP is a European Union (EU) policy that has played a significant role in supporting the sustainable agriculture and other land-based sectors across the EU (European Commission, 2021). Under the CAP, 2015-2020, the Scottish Government has provided financial support to farmers based on the area of land farmed and for delivering environmental benefits (Marshall and MillsSheehy, 2022). The government regularly monitored changes in the agriculture and forestry sectors and collects data (under EU requirements) on farm incomes and the role that the CAP plays in supporting the sector (Thomson et al., 2018). However, while the CAP has traditionally focused on land-based businesses, many rural businesses with less than 5 hectares of land, particularly small businesses, have been left out of income support schemes (DE-FRA, 2018). Also, after Brexit – the UK exit from the EU, the Scottish Government has introduced the Agricultural Bill to ensure that the CAP can continue to support farming and agriculture sector in the future and to promote rural development and community engagement (The Scottish Government, 2020). However, it is still unclear how the Bill can support businesses outside land-based sectors, called ‘non-land-based businesses’, and their future in rural areas.

Since rural areas have diversified economies (Tiwasing et al., 2022) and are significantly associated with the wider agricultural, forestry and estate supply chains (Thomson et al., 2018), we, therefore, cannot ignore these non-land-based rural businesses. At the same time, farming and agricultural businesses in rural areas often rely on non-land-based businesses for business services and operations as well as off-farm activities (Raley and Moxey, 2000). For example, Haggblade et al. (1989) reveal that non-farm income can help stimulate farm investments and improve agricultural productivity in rural areas in Sub-Sahara Africa. Hazell and Hojjati (1995) point out that a combination of agricultural and non-agricultural activities can drive rural economies since non-farm activities can be an important source of income and employment for farmers and rural populations in Zambia. Artz et al. (2000) also identify the positive impact of livestock processing industry (e.g. meat packaging) on employment growth in rural areas in the US. Using the local case studies in England, Short et al. (2008) report that farm diversification that incorporates non-land-based businesses, such as tourism, can create new job opportunities in rural areas. Nonetheless, it is still unclear from the existing evidence on the challenges of the connections between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors, and how important these non-land-based industries are as contributors or catalysts to rural businesses in Scotland.”

Also, in Section 3 on Page 5, Lines 214-226.

“In particular, farmers in rural Scotland often receive income support from direct payments under the CAP (The Scottish Government, 2014). The CAP direct payments ran from 2015 to 2020 to provide income support to farmers, crofters, and landowners in rural areas, which in turn support the overall Scottish economy and the stability of agri-food supply chain in Scotland (The Scottish Government, 2022). The Scottish Government regularly collects data on direct farm incomes to monitor changes in farming and agriculture sectors and the impacts of these payments on land-based businesses in rural areas. Although many rural businesses rely on direct expenditure from land-based sectors, not all of them are entitled to receive CAP direct payments (DFERA, 2018). At this stage, there have been limited assessments of how changes in support levels affect different types of rural businesses, particularly non-land-based businesses (Thomson et al., 2018). As well, the interactions between non-land-based rural businesses and land-based sectors in Scotland are still limited.”

For the more accurate plural “relationships", we have carefully checked the singular and plural form of the term “relationship” throughout the paper. We use the plural term “relationships” when non-land-based businesses have relationships with more than one sector. For example, non-land-based businesses are more likely to have the “relationships” with “farming and forestry sectors”.

6. l.47. not “claimed to be” part of the economy, but “is”. The ms provides the data, so this is more than a “claim.”

Response: We have edited this point according to your suggestion on Page 2, Lines 52-53.

“The role of the land-based sectors, including farming, forestry and landed estate sectors, is still significant for local and rural economies.”

7. l.52. Delete “Also” as first word in the sentence. Not needed, and doesn’t help.

Response: We have edited it now.

8. l. 57-8 . the phrase “(under EU requirements”) in l. 58 should be moved to 57, to read “..forestry sectors and under EU requirements collects data on farm income and the role that the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) plays….” And a citation that explains more about the CAP would be useful because the global readership of the journal may not be familiar with its implications.

Response: We have edited this sentence according to your suggestion on Page 2, Lines 64-66.

“The government regularly monitored changes in the agriculture and forestry sectors and under EU requirement collected data on farm incomes and the role that the CAP played in supporting the sector (Thomson et al., 2018)”.

Also, we have added the brief explanation on the CAP on in Section 1 on Page 2, Lines 59-66.

“The CAP is a European Union (EU) policy that has played a significant role in supporting sustainable agriculture and other land-based sectors across the EU (European Commission, 2021). Under the CAP from 2015 to 2020, the Scottish Government provided financial support to farmers based on the area of land farmed and for delivering environmental benefits (Marshall and Mills-Sheehy, 2022). The government regularly monitors changes in the agriculture and forestry sectors and under EU requirement collects data on farm incomes and the role that the CAP played in supporting the sector (Thomson et al., 2018).”

9. l. 62, should say “…land covering less than 5 hectares…”

Response: Thank you. We have edited this sentence now on Page 2, Lines 66-68: “while the CAP has traditionally focused on land-based businesses, many rural businesses with less than five hectares of land”.

10. l.67-70 is a key point for the ms, but seems poorly formulated, focusing on “unclear from existing evidence”. It seems obvious to the outside reader that the private sector working in the parts of Scotland where agriculture and forestry are major land uses would be closely related to these important sources of business.

Response: we have edited this sentence on Page 2, Lines 87-89: “unclear from existing evidence on the key determinants of the relationships between land-based sectors and non-land-based rural businesses”, since our main objectives do not focus on the relationships between these sectors and businesses.

11. Perhaps more important, nowhere does the ms discuss he relationship between forested land and protected areas; many of Scotland’s substantial system of protected areas include significant forest lands that provide economically important ecosystem services when they are managed for conservation. This key element needs further discussion, and a substantial literature is available to provide the necessary evidence that this land use is not being overlooked by policy and research, as claimed in lines 16-17.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion, which is really interesting. However, it is beyond the scope of our study and our data cannot answer this question. Therefore, we have now added your suggestion to Section 7 as a recommendation for future studies on Page 23 Lines 798-804.

“Next, it is important to note that the scope of this study is limited to three land-based sectors. As such, future research could further explore the relationship between forested land and protected areas. Given that many of Scotland’s substantial system of protected areas encompass significant forest lands, which can provide valuable ecosystem services when managed for conservation, such research would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the economic benefits of conservation practices in Scotland.”

12. l. 75 better to say, “…various rural classifications.” Not “different”, and “the relationship” is misleading; better to say “relationships” because they are likely to be multiple. A repeating problem, see not 15 below..

Response: We have edited this point and proofread our paper now.

13. l. 77. The four Scottish regions need a map.

Response: We have added this map to our revision on Page 8. We have also mentioned this map on Page 8, Lines 288-290: “Figure 2 illustrates the graphical distribution of businesses included in this survey across the four regions, with the density of businesses represented by different shades of purple.”

14. l. 79, international readers will not necessarily be aware of the 2015 CAP reforms, so it would help to at least mention these briefly. And is this really “the first to examine” the relationship between the agriculture and forestry operations and the private sector that is providing them with the goods and services they require?

Response: We have deleted the “2015 CAP” term to avoid confusion. We have also added the brief explanation on the CAP on in Section 1 on Page 2, Lines 59-66.

“The CAP is a European Union (EU) policy that has played a significant role in supporting sustainable agriculture and other land-based sectors across the EU (European Commission, 2021). Under the CAP from 2015 to 2020, the Scottish Government provided financial support to farmers based on the area of land farmed and for delivering environmental benefits (Marshall and MillsSheehy, 2022). The government regularly monitors changes in the agriculture and forestry sectors and under EU requirement collects data on farm incomes and the role that the CAP played in supporting the sector (Thomson et al., 2018).”

Also, Section 3 on Pages 5-6, Lines 214-226:

“In particular, farmers in rural Scotland often receive income support from direct payments under the CAP (The Scottish Government, 2014). The CAP direct payments ran from 2015 to 2020 to provide income support to farmers, crofters, and landowners in rural areas, which in turn support the overall Scottish economy and the stability of agri-food supply chain in Scotland (The Scottish Government, 2022). The Scottish Government regularly collects data on direct farm incomes to monitor changes in farming and agriculture sectors and the impacts of these payments on land-based businesses in rural areas. Although many rural businesses rely on direct expenditure from land-based sectors, not all of them are entitled to receive CAP direct payments (DREFA, 2018). At this stage, there have been limited assessments of how changes in support levels affect different types of rural businesses, particularly non-land-based businesses (Thomson et al., 2018). As well, the interactions between non-land-based rural businesses and land-based sectors in Scotland are still limited.”

On Page 3, Lines 100-103, we have also changed the “the first to examine” to “Given the lack of research and data on non-land base business in rural areas, this study aims to investigate the factors that determine the relationships between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors in rural Scotland.”, since our study particularly consider the key determinants of relationships between land-based sectors and wider rural businesses outside land-based sectors.

15. l. 81-2. “…interested in whether or not non-land-based businesses have the relationship….” First, here and throughout, “the relationship” is used when it would be much more accurate to say, “the relationships” because they are certainly many, and complex, as is typical of private sector innovation that makes rural business successful. And not “whether or not”. Consider saying, “…we are interested in identifying the relationships between the land-based businesses and those providing support to them."

Response: We have edited this according to your suggestion on throughout the paper.

16. l. 86, make a new paragraph starting with “In this analysis…”

Response: We have edited this according to your suggestion.

17. l. 103. Better to say “….policy changes throughout the economy.”

Response: We have deleted this sentence to make the section logical now.

18. l. 111. Better to say “…30% of Scotland’s overall economy…”

Response: We have edited this according to your suggestion on Page 5 Lines 191-192.

19. l. 137. International readers may need to be reminded what is a “crofter”, a Scottish occupation.

Response: we have explained a “crofter” in Footnote 3 on Page 5: “Crofters traditionally refer to small-scale farmers who work on small plots of land, often on the fringes of the Highlands and Islands. These crofters are typically tenants, who rent their land from larger landowners or estates, and grow crops or raise livestock for their own use or for sale.”

20. l. 178. “…we still know little about the role of…..” But the ms has provided considerable information about their roles, and no doubt the private sector literature would be able to provide considerably more.

Response: There are several academic papers that demonstrate the association between the private sector and land-based sectors such as agriculture and farming. Previous studies have also examined the impact of land-based sectors on rural communities and businesses. However, there are few papers specifically focusing on identifying the determinants of land-based sectors and non-land-based businesses in rural Scotland, which is the focus of our case study.

21, l. 180-181. Seems a little strange to say, “Given the importance of the overall Scottish economy….” Important how? Surely to the people living there, and perhaps to the British economy more generally, but why say it here? Instead, say something more relevant to the ms.

Response: To avoid confusion, we have now deleted this.

22. l. 183-5. “Therefore, the government policy and business support for rural businesses in Scotland should cover these non-land based industries too.” Of course, and surely they already do? No evidence presented here suggests that they are being ignored.

Response: Based on the Scottish Rural Development Programme (SRDP) and new agricultural support policies (https://www.gov.scot/policies/agriculture-payments/scottish-rural-development-programme-srdp/), such as the Agriculture Bill, the government has provided funding to support rural development. However, not all non-land-based businesses in rural areas are covered by these policies.

While the government does acknowledge the importance of non-land-based industries in rural economies, such as food and drink and tourism, there is limited information available about these businesses outside of the land-based sectors, as the government primarily focuses on the economic contribution of farming and forestry to rural areas (Thomson et al., 2018).

We have provided evidence in Point 5 of our study to support the assertion that non-land-based businesses in rural areas are not receiving adequate government policy and business support, despite their importance to rural economies.

23. l. 194-5. Need a map for these four Scottish regions. And how do the various maps of Scottish geographic divisions vary? Relevance?

Response: We have added the map for four Scottish regions on Page 8: “Figure 2 illustrates the graphical distribution of businesses included in this survey across the four regions, with the density of businesses represented by different shades of purple.”

24. l. 203-4 were very similar to l. 209-211. Avoid such repetition and make the point more clearly.

Response: We have edited this point now.

25. l. 215, better to say, “Although these data are from a rural business survey….” Note that data is a plural term.

Response: We have edit this point now and have check that we use a plural term for data throughout the paper.

26. Table 1 is another example of the inappropriate use of “the relationship”, when the more appropriate term would be “relationships”. Rural business surely have multiple relationships with farmers, foresters, fishermen, and so forth.

Response: Apologies for this mistake. We have now edited this point now. Also, we have checked the singular and plural term for “ relationship” throughout the paper now.

27. l. 237. “First”, not firstly. 238 and 240, “relationships” [use the plural]. l. 240, say “land-based industries”. They are plural. And was it really necessary to ask those in the land-based industries if they have any relationships with the private sector? Of course they do, every time they go shopping….

Response: We acknowledge that the private sector is strongly associated with land-based sectors, but our study aims to identify the key determinants of these associations since not all private businesses in rural areas have relationships with land-based sectors. Additionally, we are interested in exploring differences in business performance, future plans, and challenges related to Brexit among non-land-based businesses that do have relationships with these sectors in different rural classifications. We have mentioned these points as our main objectives in Section 1 on Page 3, Lines 91-96.

“Therefore, the objectives of this study are to:

1) examine the key determinants of the linkages between rural businesses and the relationship with land-based sectors (i.e., farming, forestry and estates) in Scotland.

2) explore the differences in business performance, future plans and challenges of non-land-based rural businesses that have the connections with land-based sectors in different rural classifications.”

28. l.287-290. Table 2. I have no idea what this says. Table 3 is similarly mysterious. And in explaining them, it is still “the relationship” when it needs to be “relationships”.

Response: We have edited the title of Table 2 now on Page 13 Lines 465-466:

“Table 2. The key determinants of the relationships between land-based sectors and non-land-based businesses in Scotland.”

Table 3 on Page 3, Lines 469-470:

“Table 3. The key determinants of the relationships between land-based sectors and non-land-based businesses in rural Scotland.”

29. l06. “likely to have connections…”. Not “the connections”. And why mention the private sector in Dumfries and Galloway (will international readers have any idea of why they might be more likely to have relationships (here called “connections”; how different from “relationships”?).

Response: We have decided to consistently use the term “relationship” throughout the paper.

In our analysis, we have also accounted for the impacts of regional locations on the relationship between non-land-based businesses and land-based sectors, as our survey data was collected from four specific regions.  We have provided further explanation regarding our focus on these regions in Section 4.4 Independent Variables on Page 12-13, Lines 421-426.

“Regions and other geographical locations such as rural areas and small towns are controlled in the model since they can influence the connection with land-based sectors (Thomson et al., 2018). In particular, we include the information on businesses located in Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway, and the Scottish Borders, with Tayside being the default in the model, which is a dummy variable, since our survey was collected from four regions.”

Moreover, we have also explained and discussed this result in Section 5 Empirical results and discussion to provide more information for international readers on Page 15, Lines 484-492:

“Also, non-land-based businesses located Dumfries and Galloway are more likely to have the relationships with farming and forestry sectors. Skills Development Scotland (2016) reported that almost one third of all businesses in this region operate their businesses in the agricultural and forestry sectors. Therefore, these land-based sectors still play a strategic role in the process of economic and business development of this region. However, those located in Aberdeenshire are less likely to have the relationships with forestry and landed estate sectors. This is because Aberdeenshire is home to a rich diversity of forests and woodlands which provide significant economic, environmental, and social benefits in the region (Aberdeenshire Council, 2017).”

30. Pages 11-12 are packed with “the relationship”, “the connection” “the link” when these should all be plural terms. These pages will require a lot of editorial help. For example, l.422 and 432 say “difference” when “different” is meant; and a different term would be more suitable anyway.

Response: We have edited these comments and have had this paper proofread now.

31. l. 465, “Considering the impact of Brexit…”. International readers are unlikely to have the necessary understanding of a policy that is very well familiar to the Scottish farmers, foresters, fishers, and so forth. Explaining “challenge or opportunity” would help.

Response: We have explained the challenges and opportunities of Brexit in Section 4.3 on Page 12, Lines 405-410:

“Previous studies show that Brexit could potentially add pressure on the UK economy due to labour shortages, UK-EU trade barriers, and supply chain disruption (Shuck-smith, 2019; Billing et al., 2021; Tiwasing, 2021). However, some studies suggest that Brixit could provide opportunities for the UK to expand its global trade and create its own regulatory framework (Billing et al., 2021). Thus, businesses that are willing and able to adapt to these changes may find Brexit as an opportunity.”

32. The conclusions and policy recommendations need a lot of work, too. I got to tired of making detailed editorial recommendations. Let the editors of an appropriate European agricultural journal deal with them.

Response: we have revised the conclusion and policy recommendations as well as a theoretical contribution and implications in Section 6 on Page 21-23, Lines 689-787. Also, we have highlighted future research directions in Section 7 on Pages 23-24, Lines 788-809.

We have carefully reviewed and revised the manuscript in response to feedback from all reviewers, and we believe that it now meets the necessary criteria for publication in Land.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx