Sustainable Economic Growth and Land Management: A Case Study on the Role of Tax Legislation in Emerging Markets

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Abstract

It is suggested that appropriate quantitative expression be added to the main conclusions of the abstract.

 

Introduction

Background

 

It is suggested that the significance and shortcomings of research should be clearly and briefly highlighted in the article.

It is more appropriate to change the “background” to a “research review”.

 

Materials and Methods

A concise description of the process and methods for obtaining the raw data is recommended.

This part lacks the spatial location map of the study area.

It is suggested that list all the methods used in the paper, Including specific formulas and steps, preferably under subheadings.

 

 

Case study

This section is really just “Scenario, Data capture and statistical analysis”, and is not a complete case study process. It is proposed to be merged with Part 3 Materials and Methods.

 

Results

It is recommended that sub-headings in the results represent or summarize the content of each section rather than just the name of the method procedure or step(such as Results for variable 1, Results for variable 2,in the article).

The result part lacks the spatial or geographical feature presentation of the research results.

 

Discussion

The discussion should be based on the results and Literature review of this study, at the same time, be careful not to overlap too much with the results,and make sure the results are sufficient to support the discussion. Any discussions should be beyond the local case itself to comparative analysis study(The study of Sustainable Economic Growth and Land Management by other authors, the study of Sustainable Economic Growth and Land Management in other areas), otherwise it cannot attract more international readers.

 It would be better if the authors can supplement the subtitle of research contributions, and recommendations of future studies.

 

Conclusions

 It is suggested that express the conclusions with serial numbers.

In general, the conclusion should be based on the previous results and discussions, and should be brief and concise, giving only the core concluding content without elaboration.

Overall, the paper is a good technical effort. There still are some repetition and grammar errors in the MS, authors need to check them carefully. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have addressed all the comments as follows:

• Abstract: We have added quantitative expressions to the main conclusions to enhance clarity and precision (lines 25-27).
• Research Review: The section now clearly highlights the significance and shortcomings of the research (lines 263-266, 332-336). We have also changed "Background" to "Research Review" for better alignment with the content (line 215).
• Materials and Methods: A concise description of the data collection process has been included (lines 495-500), along with a spatial location map of the study area (Appendix A). We have listed all methods used (lines 501-510).
• Case Study: This section has been merged with "Materials and Methods" to provide a more cohesive presentation of the scenario, data capture, and statistical analysis (line 591).
• Results: Sub-headings now summarize the content of each section rather than merely naming the method (lines 700, 740). We have included spatial or geographical data for the research results (Appendix B).
• Discussion: The discussion is now more closely based on the results and literature review, trying to avoid overlap with the results section. We have expanded the discussion to include the research implications and the potential future lines (lines 997-1015, 1071-1091).
• Conclusions: Conclusions have been reduced, expressed with serial numbers for clarity (lines 1095-1108). They are brief and concise, focusing on core content derived from the results and discussions.

Additionally, we have also reviewed the manuscript for repetition and grammatical errors to ensure clarity and coherence.

Thank you again for your constructive feedback.

Kindest regards,

The authors.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. I strongly suggest to add a map with the location of the case study for the people that are not familiar with Perú.

2. Will be nice to include as well a map with the porcentage or location of medium-size producers and agricultural land use in the Amazon.

3. I have some mixed-feelings about your paper. In your text I read a lot about economic growth in the region and the creation of productre areas of clusters (wich I am sure are needed) but what about the environmental impact? It is really necessary to promote industrial agriculture?

4. Could you please state if the tax benefit do not affect environmental issues or sociocultural issues?

5. Can you name some examples of cooperatives? what are their actions in orther to improve their livelihood conditions? It looks that the Amazon Law promotes modern colonialism instead of integral policies.

6. What other options are posible if there is no tax benefit?

7. Some images of the region or farmers will be nice to add.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We have carefully addressed all your suggestions as follows:

1. In Appendix A, we have added a map with the location of the case study to assist readers unfamiliar with Perú.
2. In Appendix B, we included a chart showing the percentage and location of medium-size producers and agricultural land use in the Amazon.
3. In the Introduction section, we have expanded the discussion to include the environmental impact of promoting industrial agriculture, balancing it with economic growth considerations (lines 184-192).
4. In the Discussion section, we clarified how the tax benefits relate to environmental and sociocultural issues, ensuring a comprehensive analysis (lines 1034-1042).
5. In the Results section, we provided examples of cooperatives and detailed their actions to improve livelihood conditions, addressing concerns about the Amazon Law and modern colonialism (lines 940-948).
6. In the Conclusions section, we explored alternative options if tax benefits are not available, offering a broader perspective on potential strategies (lines 1133-1139).
7. Additionally, in Appendix A, we added images of the farmers to enrich the visual context of our study.

We appreciate your insightful feedback, which has significantly enhanced the quality of our paper.

Best regards,

The authors

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper examines the impact of tax incentives introduced by the so-called Amazon Law (Law No. 27037) on small and medium-sized agro-industrial producers in the Junín and Huánuco regions of Peru. The research also seeks to foster collaboration between legislators and agricultural institutions to improve the implementation of this legislation. This is a relevant and well-positioned topic, considering the socio-economic challenges in the Amazon regions and the pressing need for more inclusive fiscal policies.

Overall, the text is well-written and presents a promising study with solid methodology and clear objectives, though it could benefit from increased clarity and conciseness in some sections.

For example, in the abstract, the phrase "in nature data were, therefore, gathered" (line 20) could be rephrased for better comprehension. Similarly, in the introduction, "with a large part of the land uncultivated" (line 48) is somewhat vague and would benefit from additional context. In the statement "The agricultural sector showed significant growth, with a 9% increase in July" (lines 50–51), it would be more precise to specify the temporal context (e.g., "compared to the previous year"), and "contributes 7.5% of GDP" (line 55) should specify that this refers to the national GDP.

The text could also be streamlined by removing redundancy. For instance, the research questions (RQ1–RQ4) and specific objectives (O1–O4) (lines 112–151) address the same theme—the relationship between tax benefits (VC1) and the different dimensions of local economic development (D1–D4). These sections could be merged into a single, concise section to enhance readability.

Certain sentences are overly long and would benefit from being divided. For instance, the sentences in lines 71–83 could be shortened, and the statement "This research seeks to contribute to existing knowledge by examining the regulatory provisions and their impact on the economic development of small and medium-sized agricultural producers organised in associations" (lines 154–157) could be split into two sentences to improve clarity.

Moreover, it does not appear that a simulation of income tax liquidation under the Amazon Law was included in the paper (line 201).

In the background section, the authors effectively situate the study within the broader international debate on tax incentives as tools for economic development. However, the section would benefit from additional references specific to the Peruvian context.

For broader accessibility, the term "collection efficiency" (line 359) should be explicitly defined, and the statement "Therefore, we consider that the tax benefit is initially a tax expenditure by not collecting taxes" (lines 368–369) requires clarification.

In Table 1 (questions corresponding to the indicator I1D4VC1 and the indicator below) there are redundancies between the terms "Deferrals" and "Postponements," which seem to describe the same concept. Additionally, the numbering of indicators for "Postponements" and "Simplified Regimes" (I2xxxx in both cases) needs correction. Below the table, I suggest adding a note to explain the distinction between special regimes and simplified regimes within the context of the legislation.

Consider relocating Tables 1 and 2 to the end of sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2, respectively, while briefly referencing the survey design and the development and administration of the questionnaires.

The discussion on research design and correlation coefficients is adequate. However, the lack of contextual data on Junín and Huánuco represents a significant omission. These provinces' socio-economic, geographic, cultural, and productive characteristics likely influence the findings. A dedicated section describing these provinces—covering demographics, agricultural practices, cooperative structures, and logistical or environmental factors—would strengthen the study.

The results section should also be revised to use more rigorous scientific language and remove redundancy. For example, the statement "They must also consider the inapplicability of the Amazonian Law or the need for its urgent regulatory modification" (lines 590–592) is not relevant to the inclusion criteria and should be clarified. Other terms, such as "habitual marketers" and "they have previously been farmers" (lines 589–590), are vague and need refinement. In line 601, it should be specified that the reference is to the internal reliability of the questionnaire.

The content of paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2 is sound but could be condensed to focus on general interpretations rather than individual percentages.

The study appears to be based on an undergraduate or postgraduate thesis developed at the Graduate School of Universidad Peruana Los Andes. This conclusion is supported by statements in the conclusion section, which describes a concrete proposal to amend the legislation under Law No. 27037 (Amazon Law) as part of the research contribution. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your thorough review and valuable feedback. We have addressed all the comments provided:

• Abstract and Introduction: We have rephrased the abstract for clarity where needed (lines 20-22) and added context to the introduction, specifying the temporal context for the agricultural growth statistic and clarifying that the GDP contribution refers to the national GDP. (lines 48-56, 57-62, 71-79)
• Research Questions and Objectives: We have simplified the research questions and specific objectives in order to enhance readability and reduce redundancy (lines 125-133, 140-151).
• Sentence Structure: Long sentences have been divided for clarity, particularly in lines 66–70 and 153–156.
• Simulation of Income Tax Liquidation: We have included a simulation of income tax liquidation under the Amazon Law to provide a comprehensive analysis (Appendix C).
• Background Section: References specific to the Peruvian context have been explicited to better situate the study (lines 269-278).
• Terminology and Clarifications: We have defined "collection efficiency" and clarified the statement regarding tax benefits as tax expenditures (lines 377-386, 396-397). Redundancies in Table 1 have been addressed, and a note explaining the distinction between “Deferrals" and "Postponements” has been added (lines 550-553).
• Table Placement: Tables 1 and 2 have been relocated to the end of sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2, respectively, with references to survey design and questionnaire development (lines 547-550, 584-590).
• Contextual Data on Junín and Huánuco: A dedicated text describing the socio-economic, geographic, cultural, and productive characteristics of Junín and Huánuco has been added to strengthen the study (lines 980-989).
• Results Section: We have revised the results section to use more rigorous scientific language, clarified terms, and specified references to internal reliability (lines 635-640).
• Content of Paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2: We have added a text that summarizes and condenses the key findings, even though we believe the details in these sections are significant and have maintained the content's integrity (lines 777-789).

We appreciate your insights, which have significantly improved the quality and clarity of our paper. Thank you for your guidance.

Best regards,

The authors

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper presents a study aimed at examining how tax incentives resulting from the Amazon Law (Law No. 27037) impact small and medium-sized agro-industrial producers in the Junín and Huánuco regions in Peru. The study is descriptive and correlational using a regression discontinuity approach. The study is based on a survey using a Likert scale to measure participants’ perceptions concerning tax benefits and economic development. In the survey participated cooperatives.

The authors in great detail presented the study methodology, background, materials and results.

The applied methods were correctly chosen and implemented. The tables are well-designed and clearly present the study findings. The study results are compelling and the conclusions are based on them.

In my opinion the last paragraph of conclusions is a bit questionable as it directly mentions specific institution that should conduct further studies.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your thorough review and valuable feedback.

We have specifically revised the last paragraph of the conclusions to ensure it maintains a neutral tone and does not directly mention any specific institution for conducting further studies. This adjustment aligns with the overall objective of the study to provide general recommendations based on the findings, without prescribing actions to particular entities.

We appreciate your insights, which have contributed to enhancing the clarity and neutrality of our conclusions.

Kindest regards,

The authors