Meta-Analysis on Farmers’ Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in East Africa: Evidence from Chinese Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper examined the impact and factors contributing to the adoption of improved technologies in Africa in the technology demonstration programmes of Chinees government. The study used a meta-analysis approach to conclude which factors contributed to the technology adoption.
The following are my suggestions.
1. The conclusions seem to be very generic; authors may categorise technologies in to groups like labour saving, skill intensive, capital intensive and discuss the determinants in each case. That will give which type of technologies are driven by which factors.
2. Authors may develop some sort of “Theory of Change” see Reddy, A. A. (2019). The soil health card Scheme in India: Lessons learned and challenges for replication in other developing countries. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 9(2), 124-156. To develop a logical framework for theory of change, which should include bottlenecks in adoption.
3. Table 3 sub-groups, in some cases, all sub groups categories are not included. Please ensure entire sample is included in all groups. Give details about ES etc in foot notes of the table.
4. Tables needs to be self-explanatory with full meaning of all abbreviations.
Table 2, clearly explain what is the dependent variable in the table.
Table 3 title needs to be self-explanatory, at least should mention Author’s may explain why in table 3, study area variable has two sub-groups (in access to credit), while 3 in age group. Similar disturbances are existing in other occasions.
Most of the tables and figures are having similar problem, these should be self-explanatory as much as possible. Many figures at the end are just taken from the software and inserted in the draft, which needs to be properly formatted and retyped to include in the paper.
Comments on the Quality of English Languagemoderate editing is required
Author Response
Dear Reviewer, thank you very much for your comment, kindly find the attached document to view my responses.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn my opinion this is a well written paper applying basic meta-analysis. However, it is very hard for me to revognize any meaningful scientific importance of the research. The conclusions drawn from the analysis and which are presented by the authors as being of interest to policy makers are rather generic and could have been expected a priori, even without the application of meta-analysis.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor errors in the text, but overall the paper is well written.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer, thank you for your comments, kindly find the attached document to view my responses.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper presents a comprehensive meta-analysis on the determinants of agricultural technology adoption in East African countries, particularly those receiving support from Chinese Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centers (ATDCs). This study is relevant as it addresses critical issues of agricultural productivity and food security in a region where these challenges are pervasive.
The focus on East Africa and the role of ATDCs is timely, considering the ongoing efforts to improve agricultural productivity and reduce poverty in the region. The paper contextualizes the importance of technology adoption in addressing these issues.
The use of meta-analysis, incorporating data from 22 studies across multiple countries, provides a robust framework for understanding the factors influencing technology adoption. The selection criteria and analytical methods (e.g., the random-effect model) are well-justified and align with the study’s objectives.
The paper identifies key determinants such as access to credit, education, and extension services, providing valuable insights into factors that facilitate or hinder technology adoption. The inclusion of variables like distance to market and household characteristics adds depth to the analysis.
While the findings are well-presented, some sections, particularly those detailing the methodology and results, could benefit from clearer organization. Enhanced use of tables or figures to summarize key results would aid reader comprehension.
The paper acknowledges heterogeneity in the data but could further discuss potential biases in the included studies and how these might affect the overall conclusions. Addressing the limitations of meta-analysis, particularly regarding data selection and publication bias, would strengthen the paper's credibility.
While the conclusion highlights recommendations, further elaboration on how specific stakeholders (governments, NGOs, etc.) can implement these insights in practical terms would enhance the paper’s impact. Concrete examples of successful interventions could provide a roadmap for future efforts.
Overall, the paper makes a contribution to the literature on agricultural technology adoption in East Africa. Its findings offer valuable guidance for policymakers and practitioners aiming to enhance the uptake of innovative agricultural practices. With minor revisions to improve clarity and expand on the practical implications, this paper would be a valuable addition to the field.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe paper presents a comprehensive meta-analysis on the determinants of agricultural technology adoption in East African countries, particularly those receiving support from Chinese Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centers (ATDCs). This study is relevant as it addresses critical issues of agricultural productivity and food security in a region where these challenges are pervasive.
The focus on East Africa and the role of ATDCs is timely, considering the ongoing efforts to improve agricultural productivity and reduce poverty in the region. The paper contextualizes the importance of technology adoption in addressing these issues.
The use of meta-analysis, incorporating data from 22 studies across multiple countries, provides a robust framework for understanding the factors influencing technology adoption. The selection criteria and analytical methods (e.g., the random-effect model) are well-justified and align with the study’s objectives.
The paper identifies key determinants such as access to credit, education, and extension services, providing valuable insights into factors that facilitate or hinder technology adoption. The inclusion of variables like distance to market and household characteristics adds depth to the analysis.
While the findings are well-presented, some sections, particularly those detailing the methodology and results, could benefit from clearer organization. Enhanced use of tables or figures to summarize key results would aid reader comprehension.
The paper acknowledges heterogeneity in the data but could further discuss potential biases in the included studies and how these might affect the overall conclusions. Addressing the limitations of meta-analysis, particularly regarding data selection and publication bias, would strengthen the paper's credibility.
While the conclusion highlights recommendations, further elaboration on how specific stakeholders (governments, NGOs, etc.) can implement these insights in practical terms would enhance the paper’s impact. Concrete examples of successful interventions could provide a roadmap for future efforts.
Overall, the paper makes a contribution to the literature on agricultural technology adoption in East Africa. Its findings offer valuable guidance for policymakers and practitioners aiming to enhance the uptake of innovative agricultural practices. With minor revisions to improve clarity and expand on the practical implications, this paper would be a valuable addition to the field.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer, thank you very much for your comments. Kindly download the attached document to view my responses.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear authors, the paper offer an interesting topic. Some suggestions:
- Second paragraph in the Introduction; The transition from the Green Revolution's past achievements to current food insecurity issues is logical. However, adding a linking sentence about how the Green Revolution's achievements have not fully addressed all issues of food insecurity would improve the flow.
- Following the line 53, a transitional sentence explaining why China’s efforts are significant in the context of global food security could help to boost argument.
- The introduction of ATDCs is well-placed after discussing China's aid history. However, the transition from describing the ATDCs' establishment to listing their objectives could be smoother. A brief sentence summarizing the impact or significance of ATDCs before listing the objectives would be beneficial.
- the section discussing the "going out" strategy could be better integrated into the overall narrative. Clarify how this strategy directly impacts agricultural technology adoption in East Africa.
- Line 104-105; This sentence is somewhat unclear. Improve it by specifying that criteria were used for screening studies (I believe should be supported by your PRISMA diagram)
- Line 105, sentence that starts with ‘firstly’; it can be clarified to indicate the process more clearly.
- Line 107; This sentence should indicate the logical progression more clearly.
- Line 153; While it’s noted that access to credit significantly influences technology adoption, consider elaborating on how the access to credit specifically translates to increased technology adoption.
- Starting from Line 159; The text indicates that older farmers are more likely to adopt technologies due to their experience, supported by several studies. To enhance this section, discuss how age-related experience contributes to adoption—does it involve familiarity with technology or increased risk tolerance?
- Starting from Line 226; The section notes heterogeneity in access to credit based on study area, sample size, and year of study. To improve clarity, you can explicitly state how each factor (study area, sample size, year) impacts the relationship between access to credit and technology adoption.
- Starting from Line 262; The authors can clarify how extension services impact technology adoption. Discuss what aspects of extension services (e.g., frequency, quality) are most influential.
- graphical parts can be improved
- typos and English language have to be checked
Comments on the Quality of English Languagemoderate
Author Response
Dear Reviewer, thank you very much for your comments. Kindly download the attached document view my response.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAuthors not revised the paper as per the suggestions made earlier. Just they gave reasons which are not valid. Theory of change may be included in the results along with the proper references as suggested. Without theory of change, one can’t justify this type of study. They misunderstood what theory of change; they have to go through literature and incorporate.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageModerate editing is required.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, attached is the reply to the comments
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsMinor: some figures are still graphically unacceptable. Fig.1 I will suggest to put in white the text if the background is dark blue, otherwise it remains unreadable; while figure 3A is deformed. Regarding the comments, the article has been improved.
Comments on the Quality of English Languagemoderate
Author Response
Dear reviewer, attached is the reply to the comments
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
