A Comparative Assessment of Food Security in South and North Korea Using Food Demand and Supply

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have done an excellent job in accessing data from both South and North Korea, with challenges to the latter due to incomplete and potentially unsupported and inaccurate data from the North. In spite of the problems confirming data from the North, due to the closed nature of the country to objective and thorough data collection from official channels. Nevertheless, the authors are commended for their energy invested in collecting comperable data from both sides of this divided country.

The text reads well, in spite of sub-standard use of language; there is need for a careful proofing of the entire manuscript. The paper is valuable, needs to be published, and will be more credible after thoughtful proofing by a native speaker of English. Otherwise, the paper represents useful scholarship and provides information not available in the current literature. It will be a useful resource for those interested in this country, where data from the half in the North has been relatively inaccessible for over half a century.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Described above, and needs caeful editing to be publishable.

Author Response

Overall Comment: The authors have done an excellent job in accessing data from both South and North Korea, with challenges to the latter due to incomplete and potentially unsupported and inaccurate data from the North. In spite of the problems confirming data from the North, due to the closed nature of the country to objective and thorough data collection from official channels. Nevertheless, the authors are commended for their energy invested in collecting comperable data from both sides of this divided country.

Response : We appreciate your sincere comments on this study. As you mentioned, this study tried to assssss the food security under the limited data and compare among available data as much as possible.

 

Comment 1: The text reads well, in spite of sub-standard use of language; there is need for a careful proofing of the entire manuscript. The paper is valuable, needs to be published, and will be more credible after thoughtful proofing by a native speaker of English. Otherwise, the paper represents useful scholarship and provides information not available in the current literature. It will be a useful resource for those interested in this country, where data from the half in the North has been relatively inaccessible for over half a century.

Response 1: Thank you for your suggestion. The authors has done proof reading.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Article ID: land-3788564

Title:  A Comparative Assessment of Food Security in South and North Korea from 1991 to 2020: Demand, Supply, and Agricultural Productivity

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Title:

The article's title should be modified. The title is too long and can be rewritten.

I proposed to be:  A Comparative Assessment of Food Security: Insights from South and North Korea  

Keywords:  South Korea, North Korea, you can remove from keywords, because you type it in the title. The title should not match the keywords.

Abstract:

Your abstract does not include any recommendations or limitations. Kindly ensure to address them appropriately.. and Please summarize the methodology, as it currently takes up half of the abstract.

1. Introduction

In lines 43 and 44, please mention the year of the UN. Type the full reference, please.

• Most of your citations do not mention the statistical or econometric methods used, nor do they compare these methods with those employed in your study.
• Additionally, a more extensive literature review is required. Please cite additional references and compare your study with previous studies.
• The originality/scientific novelty should be written more clearly and comprehensibly. What did the authors accomplish for the first time? What improvements did the authors make? What is the significance of the study?

- Also write the organization of the article: e.g. section 2 introduces the material and methods, section 3 displays the results, and so on.

2. Materials and Methods

- Can this study be applied to any location in other regions, and why did the authors choose South and North Korea? Please justify your case study?

- Please justify the application of the EPIC model and justify also why the variables listed in Table 1 (Data Collection for the EPIC Model) were selected.

- In Table 1: Ratio of cultivation area and Annual rice consumption per cap are called statistical data? these are economic data.

Results:

In lines : 172-176 : The annual rice yield was reduced not because of the productivity level but because 172 of the decreasing cultivated area, ranged from 5.73 million ton in 1991 to 3.95 million ton 173 in 2020. Also, the average of each decade was 4.78 million ton in 1990s, 4.45 …… Please justify your observations. Notably, during this period, prices were critical in the years 2008 and 2009.

Conclusions

In line 388: Therefore, the countries should adapt climate technology for sustainable food production before climate change affects the national crop productivity. It's good to mention the recommendation, but why weren't further studies and limitations mentioned?

References: adequate and relevant to the topic

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Comment 1: (Title) The article's title should be modified. The title is too long and can be rewritten. I proposed to be: A Comparative Assessment of Food Security: Insights from South and North Korea 

Response 1: (Title) As suggested by the reviewer, we changed the title of article to < A Comparative Assessment of Food Security in South and North Korea using Food Demand and Supply>. This revision was based on your suggestion including the major keywords such as food dmenad and supply in order to make the article contents clearly presented at the tittle.

<Before>

(L2-4) A Comparative Assessment of Food Security in South and North Korea from 1991 to 2020: Demand, Supply, and Agricultural productivity

<After>

(L2-3) A Comparative Assessment of Food Security in South and North Korea using Food Demand and Supply

 

Comment 2: (Keywords) South Korea, North Korea, you can remove from keywords, because you type it in the title. The title should not match the keywords.

Response 2: (Keywords) Thank you for meontining it. We deleted the keywords, South Koea and North Korea based on your comments.

<Before>

(L35-36) Keywords: Food security, Food Supply and demand, EPIC model, Crop productivity, South Korea, North Korea

<After>

(L32) Keywords: Food security, food supply and demand, EPIC model, crop productivity

 

Comment 3: (Abstract) Your abstract does not include any recommendations or limitations. Kindly ensure to address them appropriately.. and Please summarize the methodology, as it currently takes up half of the abstract.

Response 3: (Abstract) Thank you for pointing it out at the abstract. According to your suggestions, the abstract has been revised by summarizing the methodology, adding limitation, and rewriting the recommendatiaon clearly.

<Before>

(L16-34) South Korea and North Korea has the same environment on Korean peninsula, but they are different socio-economic conditions which make two countries different level of crop productivity and status of food security. This study aimed at assessing food security in South Korea and North Korea by analyzing food demand and supply from 1991 to 2020. Food demand was estimated using the actual consumption for South Korea and recom-mended cereal intake for North Korea with annual population of each country. The productivity of major crops was estimated using the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) model for food supply. Finally, the food security assessment was con-ducted on whether food supply met the demand or not in two countries. South Korea achieved the food security because of the decreasing consumption with diverse nutrition and constant rice productivity despite reducing paddy rice cultivated areas. On the other hand, North Korea underwent the food insecurity for 30 years due to increasing popula-tion without food diversity and low level of crops’ productivity. Therefore, to overcome the food shortage, the North Korean government needs to improve productivity with overall reformation of agricultural infrastructures rather than expand the cultivated areas with low productivity. Both of South Korea and North Korea should prepare the climate change impacts at the long term with considering other interrelated sectors such as water and energy.

<After>

(L17-31) South Korea and North Korea share the same environment on the Korean peninsula, but they differ in socio-economic conditions, which leads to differences in crop productivity and status of food security. This study aimed at assessing food security in South Korea and North Korea by analyzing food demand and supply from 1991 to 2020. Food security was assessed by determining whether the food supply met the demand in two countries. South Korea achieved food security due to decreasing consumption, diverse nutrition, and stable rice productivity despite a reduction in cultivated paddy areas. In contrast, North Korea has faced food insecurity for 30 years, caused by a growing population, a lack of dietary diversity, and low crop productivity. To overcome food shortage, the North Korean government needs to focus on improving agricultural productivity through comprehensive reforms of agricultural infrastructures, rather than simply expanding low-productive cultivated areas. Although this study was conducted with limited data for North Korea, it sought to collect and utilize open and publicly accessible data. In the long term, both South Korea and North Korea should prepare for the impacts of climate change, considering agriculture related sectors such as water and energy.

 

Comment 4: (Introduction)

1. In lines 43 and 44, please mention the year of the UN. Type the full reference, please.
2. Most of your citations do not mention the statistical or econometric methods used, nor do they compare these methods with those employed in your study. Additionally, a more extensive literature review is required. Please cite additional references and compare your study with previous studies.
3. The originality/scientific novelty should be written more clearly and comprehensibly. What did the authors accomplish for the first time? What improvements did the authors make? What is the significance of the study?
4. Also write the organization of the article: e.g. section 2 introduces the material and methods, section 3 displays the results, and so on.

Response 4: (Introduction) We agree with the review’s comments on the introduction section, and revised the manuscript.

1. According to your suggestion, we added the year of MDGs and SDGs provided by UN and the references.
2. As you mentioned, the introduction of article has limited iterature review. Therefore, we added the sentencs about method from the citation, compared methods from the previous studies and this study. Also, several studies were uddated for additional literature reviews.
3. Based on your comments, we revised the manuscript to higtlight the research novelity and originality.
4. For better understanding, we wrote the sentences about the organization of the article.

<Before>

1. (L44-48) Food security appeared during the 1970s due to the global food crisis and interna-tional governments tried to reduce the insecurity level. For example, the United Nations (UN) provided the food related goals on Goal 1 to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger under MDGs (Millennium Development Goals) and Goal 2 zero hunger under SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals).
2. (L70-77) There were studies estimating food security using demand and supply concept. The studies adopting demand concept suggested ways to alleviate global food inequalities using cropland demand based on food consumption and crop productivity [3] or assessed the global self-sufficiency as increasing food demand such as population, climate, diet, and agricultural improvement [5]. Other studies adopting supply concept simulated and predicted crop yield as food supply without considering demand [19–21]. The situation of studies considering the Korean peninsula as study area were similar. Most of them simu-lated rice yield using satellite data [22–24] or developed the model for prediction [25].
3. (L78-80) In other words, previous studies rarely consider both food demand and supply together to assess food security for the long term. Therefore, we adopted the food demand and supply and assessed the food security from 1991 to 2020 in South Korea and North Korea.

<After>

1. (L39-43) Food security appeared during the 1970s due to the global food crisis, and international governments tried to reduce the insecurity level. For example, the United Nations (UN) provided food-related goals in Goal 1 to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger under the MDGs (Millennium Development Goals) in 2000 and Goal 2: zero hunger under the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) in 2015 [4].
2. (L68-97) There were studies estimating food security using the demand and supply concept [20–24]. Some studies were done at the international level. They analyzed the food wedges of the future [23] or studied food security using the economic model [24]. Other studies did a case study adopting Mann-Kendall trend test and Sen’s slope [20], virtual land use and ecological footprint [21], Cobb-Douglas production function and scenario analysis method [22]. These studies mainly focused on environmental risk such as climate change and natural disaster [20,22] or land demand [21] in terms of food supply. Also, there are studies considering only food demand or supply through various methods [3,6,25–27]. The study adopting the demand concept suggested ways to alleviate global food inequalities using cropland demand per captia based on food consumption and crop productivity through a decomposition analysis [3]. Other assessed global self-sufficiency as increasing food demand due to population growth, climate change, diet, and agricultural improvement. This research estimated the country-specific self-sufficiency ratios using the total estimated kcal production and the corresponding demand for individual countries, and, based on the level of ratio, evaluated the self-sufficiency of each country [6]. Some studies adopting the supply concept have simulated and predicted crop yield as a measure of food supply using machine learning, such as the EPIC (Environmental Policy Integrated Climate)-IIASA model with extreme gradient boosting and random forests [25], the hybrid ANN-MLR approach (Artificial Neural Network and statistical model Multiple Linear Regression) [26], and deep learning techniques such as CNNs (Convolutional Neural Networks) [27]. The studies considering the Korean peninsula as the study area simulated rice yield using satellite data with meteorological data [28–30]. Also, a study applied deep learning using satellite data and climate one for predicting the rice yield from South and North Korea [31]. Previous studies adopted various methods to estimate food security, food demand or supply, but some studies highlight the food supply rather than both of demand and supply. Although the study covered food supply and demand analysis, it concentrated on investigating the relationship between climate, production, and population rather than food security assessment [20]. In other words, there were no research adopting food demand and supply to assess food security.
3. (L98-104) Therefore, we adopted the food demand and supply approach and assessed food security from 1991 to 2020 in South Korea and North Korea and compared the countries to analyze how the socio-economic conditions affect food security. Food demand and supply did not cover all food categories but only selected the major staple in each country, such as rice and maize. We estimated food supply and demand based on a process-based crop yield model of each country and spatially assessed food security by comparing food demand and supply in South Korea and North Korea.
4. (L104-108) The second section was materials and methods including study area, materials, and methods. The third section suggested the results which estimated food demand and supply of each country and assessed the food security. The fourth section was discussion and the last was conclusion.

 

Comment 5: (Materials and Methods)

1. Can this study be applied to any location in other regions, and why did the authors choose South and North Korea? Please justify your case study?
2. Please justify the application of the EPIC model and justify also why the variables listed in Table 1 (Data Collection for the EPIC Model) were selected.
3. In Table 1: Ratio of cultivation area and Annual rice consumption per cap are called statistical data? these are economic data.

 

Response 5: (Material and Methods) We appreciate your comments about Materials and Methods section. It was valuable to improve the fluency of article and make the article more understandable.

1. The study provided the simple method for assessing the food security. It can be applied to other regions or countries if data is available. In the case of South Korea, it has relatively enough data to estimate food demand and supply, specifically. However, the data for North Korea was mostly collected from the international organization or South Korea and it is accessible. The data from South Korea was replaced with the international data.

The reason of selecting South and North Korea as the study area was that they share the same natural environmental conditions under the different socio-economic ones. Therefore, as our opinion, this study could present the influenct of socio-economic factors on food security. It was mentioned at the instruction section, but for improving the fluency, we added the justification of countries’ selection at the 2.1. Study area.

2. There are diverse model to predict crop production and productivity. However, the EPIC can simulate long term and large-scale crop yields, considering agro-environmental factors such as soil stress, climate influences, and various agricultural management systems. This model is widely used bio-physical model considering not only natural-environmental conditions but also socio-economic conditions such as level of fertilizer and irrigation level of paddy rice.

The variables of table 1 are used to run EPIC model. We tried to collect the national data, but if it was not available, selected international data. For example, the dataset for EPIC model should be long time-series and high resolution as much as possible. However, some data such as soil is not covered due to lack of data (North Korea does not open their soil data and South Korea did not have North Korea’s data). At this case, we collected international data.

3. Thank your for your feedback at the naming of data. The statistical data at this study was actual figures investigated from national governments or international organizations. Also, this study did not cover the economic perspective of food security. Therefore, this study classified Ratio of cultivation area and Annual rice consumption per capita data into statistical data. It was valualble comment to mention for clarity of table, but we decided not to revise this part based on classficiation criteria of dat collection.

<Before>

1. (L92-93) Both North Korea and South Korea share the similar natural environment and cultural features because of the same originations.
2. (L135-141) EPIC model is a bio-physical model developed in 1985 by the USDA and widely used considering climate, soil features, level of fertilizer or other agricultural infrastructures [26,27]. This model could estimate the crop production under future climate change sce-narios at the global level [28] and be optimized with the regional-specific [29]. Also, it pro-vides the distribution of potential crop productivity. Therefore, we adapted EPIC with ag-ricultural infrastructure fitting to crops’ yields of the statistical data in each country, and after running the model, the productivity of each crop was spatialized.

<After>

1. (L118-119) Both North Korea and South Korea share similar natural environment and cultural features due to their common originations.

(L134-138) Both South Korea and North Korea have the same natural-environmental conditions such as climate and topography. However, two countries are under different socio-economic conditions, and it affects the level of crop productivity and food security as well. Therefore, it is significant to assess the two countries’ food security and compare their socio-economic conditions like cropland policies.

2. (L170-181) There are various crop simulation models such as Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) Models, Elementary Crop Growth Simulator (ELCROS) Model, Crop Estimation through Resource and Environment Synthesis (CERES), and WOFOST Model [32]. Among these models, the EPIC model is a bio-physical model and simulates long-term and large-scale crop yields adopting agro-environmental factors like agricultural management systems and soil stress [33,34]. It was developed in 1985 by the USDA and is widely used, considering climate, soil features, level of fertilizer, and other agricultural infrastructure [35,36]. This model can estimate crop production under future climate change scenarios at the global level [37] and be optimized for region-specific applications [38]. It also provides the distribution of potential crop productivity. Therefore, we adapted EPIC with agricultural infrastructure settings to match crop yields from statistical data in each country.

(L141-144) The data used in this research included climate, topographic, agricultural, and statistical data. The climate, topographic, and agricultural data were inputs for the EPIC model. The data was collected from national data because of long-term and regional specificity with high resolution data, but if unavailable, we used the international data.

 

Comment 6: (Results) In lines : 172-176 : The annual rice yield was reduced not because of the productivity level but because of the decreasing cultivated area, ranged from 5.73 million ton in 1991 to 3.95 million ton in 2020. Also, the average of each decade was 4.78 million ton in 1990s, 4.45 …… Please justify your observations. Notably, during this period, prices were critical in the years 2008 and 2009.

Response 6: (Results) We agree with reviewer’s comment on results. This some part of section was omitted and it seem not easy to understand the research. We added more sentencse for supporting the observation. However, at this study we did not consider the crop prices due to the closeness of North Korea. The national government and international organization did not provide the crop price changes of whole study period. Therefore, the reviewer’s comment about the prices was not reflected.

<Before>

(L172-177) The annual rice yield was reduced not because of the productivity level but because of the decreasing cultivated area, ranged from 5.73 million ton in 1991 to 3.95 million ton in 2020. Also, the average of each decade was 4.78 million ton in 1990s, 4.45 million ton in 2000s, and 3.80 million ton in 2010s. Even though there were some gaps between the rice yields from EPIC and statistical data in 1997 and 2018, the general trends of the two data were matched (Figure 4) [32].

<After>

(L218-221) Also, the average of each decade was 4.78 million tons in the 1990s, 4.45 million tons in the 2000s, and 3.80 million tons in the 2010s, while the productivity level was sustainable. For example, the average rice productivity was 5.18 t/ha in the 1990s, 5.13 t/ha in the 2000s, and 5.29 t/ha in the 2010s.

 

Comment 7: (Conclusions) In line 388: Therefore, the countries should adapt climate technology for sustainable food production before climate change affects the national crop productivity. It's good to mention the recommendation, but why weren't further studies and limitations mentioned?

Response 7: (Conclustions) Thank you for your feedback on conclusion. We revised the conclusion part by adding further studies and limitation of research.

<Before>

(L388-389) Therefore, the countries should adapt climate technology for sustainable food production before climate change affects the national crop productivity.

<After>

(L441-445) The limitation of study was that it did not spatialize the crop productivity due to lack of data. For further study, it suggested classifying the land cover for identifying the paddy rice and maize on the Korean peninsula. It will contribute to improving the accuracy of crop production estimates.

 

Comment 8: (References) adequate and relevant to the topic

Response 8: We appreciate your sincere comments on the references.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

no further comments, the authors performed all the work I have suggested.