The Tuscany Integrated Supply Chain Projects 2014–2022: A New Path to Support the Agri-Food Industry
, Antonio Giampaolo †, Francesco Licciardo †, Matteo Orlando † and Serena Tarangioli †Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very interesting and valuable. However, the paper is not focused and needs further revision.
Firstly, in the introduction, the title of the study does not perfectly match the content of the study. The study describes the ISCP project extensively in the introduction and material methods, but does not elaborate on its relationship to the research questions. In addition, the research questions are not clearly stated, resulting in a scattered study.
Secondly, the literature review needs to focus on the research questions rather than simply introducing the ISCP project. A substantial additional research review is required.
Thirdly, the presentation of the research design is missing in Part II and further explanation is needed on how the research design supports the research questions. More detail is needed on the economic and policy evaluation methods and the selection of control groups.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1
Economic and Policy Evaluation of Integrated Supply Chain Projects in Tuscany’s rural areas
land-2430039
Point 1: Firstly, in the introduction, the title of the study does not perfectly match the content of the study. The study describes the ISCP project extensively in the introduction and material methods, but does not elaborate on its relationship to the research questions. In addition, the research questions are not clearly stated, resulting in a scattered study.
Response 1: Please find the following new title “The Tuscany Integrated Supply Chain Projects 2014-2022: a new path to support the agri-food industry”.
The introduction has been revised. Integrated supply chain projects aim to promote co-operation, and the continuity of business activities in rural areas whose conditions are highly disadvantaged compared to other production areas.
Regarding the research question, please consider (from line 79) that our objectives are consistent within the European Commission suggestions for these types of projects. From lines 98-99 and following, our aim is argued, that is assessing the co-operation and the economic development of ISCP and non-ISCP farms, including political dictates issued and recommended.
Point 2: Secondly, the literature review needs to focus on the research questions rather than simply introducing the ISCP project. A substantial additional research review is required.
Response 2: The experience of ISCP in Italy is a unicum in the European rural development policy. The authors, who have also worked on the topic in the past, are not familiar with any other experience or foreign literature on the subject. This aspect has been highlighted and addressed on line 11 of the Abstract (“Considering the scarce literature on ISCP....”).
Furthermore, comparison with any other area would be misleading or inaccurate since at the basis of ISCP programming there is a kind of "state of autonomy" to address territorial needs, as reported on lines 49-50.
Point 3: Thirdly, the presentation of the research design is missing in Part II and further explanation is needed on how the research design supports the research questions. More detail is needed on the economic and policy evaluation methods and the selection of control groups.
Response 3: Different impact assessment methods were evaluated, then a significance test was applied. All FADN farms in the Tuscan region for the period 2018-2020 were considered. As for the control group, the sample was refined by excluding outliers according to the Tukey method to make the statistical population homogeneous. The differences were analysed using the Welch’s t-test (control group and treated). The differences were analyzed not only as far as the economic performance is concerned, but also considering the structural characteristics of farms trying to provide a picture of the development, maintenance and/or modernization of agricultural entrepreneurial activity. What is mainly expected from these types of projects is not only better economic performances, but rather an impact on the growth of opportunities, of relationships between actors of the whole territory. Territorial, systemic growth rather than growth in terms of productivity.
Reviewer 2 Report
Research represents a significant contribution in this field.
Applied research methods are adequate.
The results are correctly presented.
The literature used is satisfactory for this research.
What should be done additionally is to supplement the introductory part of the paper with new references related to the research area.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2
Economic and Policy Evaluation of Integrated Supply Chain Projects in Tuscany’s rural areas
land-2430039
Point 1: What should be done additionally is to supplement the introductory part of the paper with new references related to the research area.
Response 1: The experience of ISCP in Italy is a unicum in the European rural development policy. The authors, who have also worked on the topic in the past, are not familiar with any other experience or foreign literature on the subject. This aspect has been highlighted and addressed on line 11 of the Abstract (“Considering the scarce literature on ISCP....”).
The literature refers to and analyzes the specific case of the Tuscany region. The scarce literature does not allow us to compare and discuss the Tuscan system with other Italian regions.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper presents a very interesting study evaluating the impact of one of the CAP measures in one of the Italian regions. The authors presented the methodology and results in detail. There are only minor detailed comments to be found in the text. The paper can be published after editorial modifications.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 3
Economic and Policy Evaluation of Integrated Supply Chain Projects in Tuscany’s rural areas
land-2430039
Point 1 […] There are only minor detailed comments to be found in the text.
Response 1: Please refer to lines 332-335 and line 406
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I appreciate the author's responses to my Round 1 recommendations and the respective revisions made in the initial version of the text. The changes are sufficient and adequate. I agree to publish it directly in Land.
