Review Reports - Socio-Ecological Impacts and Sustainable Transformation Pathways of Soybean Cultivation in the Brazilian Amazon Region

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Socio-ecological Impacts and Sustainable Transformation Pathways of Soybean Cultivation in the Brazilian Amazon Region" investigates the complex and multi-scalar socio-economic, environmental, and governance dimensions of soybean production in the Brazilian Amazon.

However, some major concerns were noted. There is a lack of critical engagement with the presented data. While the text references several studies and figures (e.g., GDP growth, HDI decline, forest loss), the analysis remains largely descriptive. The paper would benefit from more robust quantitative support and a critical discussion of conflicting perspectives or data. Furthermore, the arguments made regarding social inequality, legal mechanisms, and voluntary governance measures often lack empirical examples or case studies.

Some ideas are repeated across sections (e.g., land tenure conflicts are discussed in both socio-economic and legal contexts). This problem should be revised and each topic should be discussed once.

To summarize, this manuscript addresses an important and highly relevant topic. However, it requires substantial revisions to meet the standards of a high-quality scientific publication.

Specific comments:

References - numbers in brackets should be placed before the full stop at the end of a sentence. The reference list should be revised (double numbers at the beginning of each reference, DOI missing and so on).

Avoid repeating the same statements (e.g. lines 144-148).

Check the whole paper and revise double spaces and other errors.

Author Response

Comments and Responses from the First Reviewer

Critical Analysis of Data and Quantitative Support

Comments: There is a lack of critical engagement with the presented data. While the text references several studies and figures, the analysis remains largely descriptive. The paper would benefit from more robust quantitative support and a critical discussion of conflicting perspectives or data.

Responses: The paper added SPSS statistical analysis in Section 3, clarifying the correlations between soybean planting area and deforestation, agricultural chemical usage, and Cerrado deforestation.

Empirical Cases for Social Inequality, Legal Mechanisms, and Voluntary Governance

Comments: The arguments made regarding social inequality, legal mechanisms, and voluntary governance measures often lack empirical examples or case studies.

Responses: The paper supplemented specific cases in the "Discussion" section, such as the conflict case of the Guarani-Kaiowá indigenous community being forced to leave ancestral lands due to land rights violations, providing empirical support for analyses of social inequality and legal mechanisms. Due to time constraints, examples for legal mechanisms and voluntary governance measures were not included; we hope to make further Responses in the future.

Revision of Repeated Ideas

Comments: Some ideas are repeated across sections (e.g., land tenure conflicts are discussed in both socio-economic and legal contexts). This problem should be revised and each topic should be discussed once.

Responses: Land tenure conflicts were consolidated into an independent subsection (4.1.3: "Conflicts with Indigenous Communities and Land Tenure Disputes"), avoiding cross-section repetition and ensuring each topic is discussed only once.

Correction of Reference Format

Comments: References - numbers in brackets should be placed before the full stop at the end of a sentence. The reference list should be revised (double numbers at the beginning of each reference, DOI missing, etc.).

Responses: Reference numbers were reorganized according to new content, with brackets placed before punctuation at the end of sentences. Since most references are not direct quotes, double numbers at the start of each reference were not used. If necessary, this can be revised in the future. As the Land journal template does not require DOIs and published articles in Land do not include them, this content was not added.

Avoiding Repetitive Statements

Comments: Avoid repeating the same statements (e.g., lines 144-148).

Responses: The content in lines 144-148 of the original draft has been deleted.

Full Text Format Check

Comments: Check the whole paper and revise double spaces and other errors.

Responses: Redundant spaces have been mostly corrected.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Soybean cultivation and its expansion would have great impacts on local ecosystems and socio-economic development, especially in the Brazilian Amazon region. Thus, it is of great interest to explore socio-ecological impacts and sustainable transformation pathways of soybean cultivation there. However, due to lack of data analysis and updated references, it is far away to be published here, and the main questions are as follows:

(1) There are not any references in the section of Introduction, and I believe it should be added some related references there. Besides, some new references should also be added, especially after the year of 2020.

(2) All of the results are not evaluated or analyzed by data, and the authors only stated them from the references, which is not suitable here. I believe that it could be better to conduct meta-analysis without adequate data.

(3) All of the data is presented in Tables instead of Figures, and it is hard to get useful and interesting information from it. I suggest to map these results for exploring more interesting results.

(4) All the results of the impacts on soil quality and water resources sourced from previous studies, but it is hard to direct find the detailed and data of them.

(5) I suggest to conduct data analysis on all impacts to let us believe all the results.

(6) The relationships between governance and impacts should be added in this study.

(7) Why the mentioned pathways can achieve the sustainable transformation of soybean production in Brazil Amazon?

(8) I suggest to add the section of Discussion and Conclusion.

Author Response

Comments and Responses from the Second Reviewer

2.1 Adding References to the Introduction

Comments: There are no references in the Introduction section, and related references should be added. Additionally, new references, especially post-2020, should be included.

Responses: References ([1]-[9]) were added to the "Introduction" section, with an emphasis on post-2020 studies, though a small number of pre-2020 references remain.

2.2 Critical Analysis of Data and Quantitative Support

Comments: All results are not evaluated or analyzed by data; the authors only cited references, which is unsuitable. A meta-analysis is recommended if data is inadequate.

2.3 Empirical Cases for Social Inequality, Legal Mechanisms, and Voluntary Governance

Comments: Related arguments lack empirical cases .

Responses:

The paper supplemented specific cases in the "Discussion" section to empirical support for analyses, they are the following:

Social inequality: the conflict case of the Guarani-Kaiowá indigenous community being forced to leave ancestral lands due to land rights violations was added to the article for analyses of social inequality caused by soybean cultivation.

Legal mechanisms: this study uesed the case that Mato Grosso’s governor once earned Greenpeace’s “Golden Chainsaw Award” for deforestation linked to the soy industry in 2005 as example to explain the Shortcomings of the Federalism System in the Brazilian Constitution in addressing the issue of Amazon Deforestation.

Voluntary governance measures: this study used Soy Sourcing Guidelines of European Feed Manufacturer’s Federation (FEFAC) as example to show the shortage of the voluntary standards, which requires only zero illegal deforestation.

2.4 Adding Figures

Comments: All data is presented in tables rather than figures, making it difficult to extract useful or interesting information. Mapping results is suggested to explore more insights.

Responses: Maps have been added at the end of the article.

2.5 Detailed Data on Soil Quality and Water Resource Impacts

Comments: Results on soil quality and water resource impacts are sourced from previous studies, but detailed data is hard to directly access. Data analysis on all impacts is recommended to enhance credibility.

Responses: Detailed soil and water data specific to the Brazilian Amazon were unavailable, so conclusions from previous studies were retained.

2.6 Analysis of the Relationship Between Governance and Impacts

Comments: The relationships between governance and impacts should be added.

Responses: A subsection "Importance of Governance" was added before Section 4.2, emphasizing domestic and international attention to governing these impacts and the necessity of improving governance measures to mitigate adverse effects.

2.7 Explaining the Effectiveness of Sustainable Transformation Pathways

Comments: Why do the mentioned pathways achieve sustainable transformation of soybean production in the Brazilian Amazon?

Responses:

This study add the following information to explain the reason for the mentioned pathways achieve sustainable transformation.

Section 4.3.1 The statistical analysis of this study found that the Soy Moratorium effectively prevented deforestation caused by soybean production, but because it is correlated with deforestation in the Cerrado region, expanding the Soy Moratorium to the Cerrado region will reduce deforestation caused by the Amazon soybean ban in other regions。

Section 4.3.2 To explain why the protection of indigenous land tenure is an important way to promote sustainable soybean production in the Amazon region, this study added that in Brazil, indigenous land have reduced deforestation and degradation rates, often more so than in state-managed protected areas.

This study also added information to explain preventing lenient legal treatment of deforestation can better prevent the Amazon rainforest. This is because that preventing impunity for deforestation will help eliminate opportunities for deforestation to escape legal punishment and better achieve the goal of curbing the deforestation in the Amazon.

Section 4.3.3 This study used the EU’s ban on deforestation-linked soybean imports as an example of promoting transnational sustainable soybean supply chain governance, explaining the reason for strengthening international cooperation.

2.8 Adding "Discussion and Conclusion" Sections

Comments: A "Discussion and Conclusion" section is suggested.

Responses: Complete "Discussion" and "Conclusion" sections were added to the article.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors addressed the required changes, and I have no additional comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The revised manuscript has been improved a lot, but I think it can be improved by some minor revisions as follows:

(1) All figures should be presented in your text.

(2) The units should be included in your y-axis.

(3) I believe that it can be add some literature in the Introduction section.

Author Response

Commons1: All figures should be presented in your text.
Responses1: From a more rigorous perspective, we have tried my best to keep all the tables, but removed the data and analysis on insecticides. There are many types of insecticides, and genetically modified soybeans encourage the use of herbicides, therefore we retain only the analysis of herbicides and remove the analysis of insecticides to avoid controversy.
Commons2: The units should be included in your y-axis.
Responses2: We have tried my best to move the units of the figures in the y-axis data.
Commons3: I believe that it can be add some literature in the Introduction section.
Responses3: We have improved the introduction section to make it better. We add the following information in this part:
(1)
Since the 1970s, Brazilian government policies focused on developing the Amazon have profoundly transformed the region's landscape. Initially dominated by road building, mining, and cattle farming,
(2)
Governance frameworks, both domestically and internationally, struggle to reconcile economic growth with sustainability imperatives in the Amazon. At the international level, efforts are frequently constrained by the principle of national sovereignty, limiting their effectiveness. Domestically in Brazil, weak enforcement of environmental laws, conflicting land-use policies, and agricultural expansion within the Amazon contribute significantly to deforestation. While voluntary governance initiatives by non-state actors have played a complementary role, they remain heavily influenced by market forces. Consequently, existing governance mechanisms have proven inadequate to ensure the fully sustainable development of soybean cultivation in the Amazon