Can Rural Industrial Integration Alleviate Agricultural Non-Point Source Pollution? Evidence from Rural China

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is written on a topical topic. The problems of environmental pollution as a result of agricultural activities are relevant not only for China, but also for other countries. The authors rightly note the nonlinear nature of the relationship between industrial integration and the level of environmental pollution. Mathematical tools are used competently to carry out the analysis. At the same time, there are issues that require clarification.

1. In the introduction, the purpose of this article should be indicated, as well as the hypothesis put forward by the authors.

2. It is unclear why these regions were chosen for the study. this should be explained in the methodology.

3. The authors should indicate the limitations of this study. To what extent they are applicable to agriculture in other provinces of China and other countries.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors address an interesting issue and have done a considerable amount of work. The following observations may improve the final outcome of their work:

- Keywords: they should not coincide with those included in the title of the article.

- Literature review: it is practically limited to a review of the existing Chinese literature on the subject. We are dealing with a prestigious journal of an international nature; it is necessary to expand the references to the work of other authors based on the analysis of this issue in other countries.

- The discussion epigraph can be improved. In reality, hardly a discussion of the research results with those of other authors is presented (apart from a few references). I encourage authors to fill this gap taking into account the comments regarding the literature review.

In relation to the discussion section, I also recommend the elimination of the references to the limitations of the study and future lines of research (lines 522-538). It would be more appropriate to incorporate these ideas in a final paragraph of the conclusions.

- The conclusions are insufficient and, strictly speaking, are limited to one paragraph (lines 540-555) which, in my opinion, do not adequately relate the objectives and hypotheses of the investigation.

- Other notes:

Lines 36-39: a specific source is mentioned, the incorporation of the corresponding quote is missing.

Lines 46-48: Same thing.

Line 80: Define the meaning of the initials EKC the first time they are referred to in the text.

Line 483: when referring to the majority of scholars, it is convenient to specify at least some of them.

Lines 484-486: The same.

Line 502: Kuznets is quoted but his work is not mentioned.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have made an effort to answer the questions raised, although there is still room for further questions to be asked:

- The theoretical framework has been extended beyond the Chinese literature, but are there no relevant contributions to the subject from French, German, Italian, American authors? Furthermore, there is a lack of a more mature understanding of what the new works cited by these others contribute to the research approach. It is not a question of expanding the list of bibliographical references, but of enriching the theoretical framework of the research. 

- A good illustration of this is that the paper still does not present a real discussion of the results.

- The first paragraphs of the conclusions are dispensable. They are a repetition of ideas incorporated in the first sections. The rest of the ideas presented are very descriptive in nature, surely there is not more to be gained from the work done?

- Regarding the other minor issues, despite the authors' response, points 8, 9 and 10 remain uncorrected. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf