Next Article in Journal
Assessment of a Multifunctional River Using Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Model in Xiaoqing River, Eastern China
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatio-Temporal Analysis and Influencing Factors of Rural Resilience from the Perspective of Sustainable Rural Development
Previous Article in Journal
The Effect of Mindful Leadership on Employee Innovative Behavior: Evidence from the Healthcare Sectors in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Common Prosperity Level and Regional Difference Analysis along the Yangtze River Economic Belt
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Policy Evaluation of Demonstration Cooperative Construction: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(19), 12259; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912259
by Rui Chen, Nawab Khan and Shemei Zhang *
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(19), 12259; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912259
Submission received: 8 September 2022 / Revised: 22 September 2022 / Accepted: 23 September 2022 / Published: 27 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Livelihoods Resilience and Sustainable Rural Development)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Useful research with a high potential and meaning for policy makers to assess whether current support policies and regulations promote and enable development of cooperatives in China. For the international scientific readership, the paper can be useful for comparative studies.

I recommend to exclude number from the title: it is not necessary to mention that evidence was gathered from 509 cooperatives. You explain this later in the methodology part. Abstract comprises all relevant information; however, some sentences should be placed in other sequence for more logical abstract structure. I suggest that all text in the abstract follows this logic: 1) describe the problem of the research and its aim, 2) describe the methodology (thus the final sentence of the abstract should be here), 3) mention the main results, and 4) point out some benefits of the results for  the readers/ further studies. 

The aim of the research must be included in the introduction. In the current manuscript it can be found only in in the 3.2. section. I also suggest to use more gender-neutral expressions, for example, instead of “chairman” (line 334 and forward) it is better to use “chairperson”. Some information about the ethical guidelines during the research must be included in the methodology.

The authors have referred to many studies, but I would suggest to include more international experience regarding cooperative analysis.

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you we have revsed the manuscript accordingly.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

The manuscript presents a quite interesting study, but I have some observation:

-       In medium how large is such a demonstration cooperative, in terms of members, land, etc?

-       What do you mean by”democratic management”, line 571?

-       At line 590 you state that ” In terms of economic strength, the total capital contribution of the members of the demonstration cooperatives is 47.3% higher than that of the non-demonstration cooperatives, and this indicator is significant at the 10% significance level.” What ist in medium the total capital contribution of the members of a demonstration cooperative?

-       It will be important so see you own proposals for the future in terms of demonstration cooperative!

Author Response

Thank you we have revised the manuscript accordingly.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop