Food Consumption–Production Adjustments to Economic Crises under Credit Constraints in Nigeria
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper analyzes the impact of credit constraints on the ability of agricultural producers to adapt to food security shocks by diversifying the food production.
The problem at hand is of significant practical and business relevance since the food security in African countries is becoming one of the urgent issues in view of political and macroeconomic instability as well as climate factors. The public policies put in place across African countries are primarily aimed at increasing productivity of agricultural producers and increase the incomes of households in order to accelerate shift from subsistence farming towards sustainable and diversified productive agricultural sector. The potential consequences of lack of robust strategy to handle the existing issues related to lack of long-term financing for agricultural transformation threatens to aggravate the problems of food security across the affected countries. Therefore, the problem undertaken by the authors of the paper is of significant relevance for policymakers and households.
The paper proceeds by stating the problem, namely that economic shocks are threatening agricultural transformation across the affected countries by focusing on the case of Nigeria. The households are trying to diversify food production to reduce nutrition losses. However, in order for the said diversification to succeed, the affected households require an access to financial resources, which can be done through dedicated financial vehicles, whose purpose should be to focus on fostering agricultural transformation.
Relying on empirical data from Nigeria’s Agricultural Transformation Agenda, the authors demonstrate that access to credit resources has a significant impact on households’ ability to effectively diversify food production.
The presented study is among the few which ponder the problem formulated by the authors. I consider the proposed solution to be of significant relevance and business value.
Overall, both the theoretical and empirical parts of the paper are done well with results being reported in a clear way. The methodology employed by the authors is appropriate to the problem at hand. The literature review is sufficient. Overall, I have no critical remarks with regards to methodology employed by the authors. The authors rely on a unique database assessing the credit status of households participating in the Nigeria’s GHS panel. The credit access status is subsequently correlated with the food variety score, food crop variety, caloric intakes etc., all of which demonstrate the households’ ability to effectively participate in agricultural transformation. The FE models are run in order to establish multi-variate relationships within the proposed setting. The authors have also tries to address the endogeneity concerns.
The literature review is extensive and exhaustive.
In my opinion, the policy implications section can be extended. The authors may do a better job explaining the practical implications of the study, also for future policy making decisions made at the central level. What kind of financial vehicles may be designed at the central level in order to mitigate the discussed problem? Maybe some of the African countries already have a suggested vehicle? A few sentences with regards to the policy implications should also be placed in the paper’s abstract.
Overall, I enjoyed reading the paper.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on how our manuscript could be improved. My coauthor and I have revised our manuscript following your good comments. Please see the attachment!
Best regards!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper makes some valuable insights however some improvements need to be made in the following sections of the paper.
The aim of the paper in the abstract should be more precise and should reflect the content of the paper. The aim of the paper should be also included in the introduction. The research question/s should be included in the section Introduction to clarify the research problem. The separate section: literature review in the paper is required or section 1.1 and 1.2 could organised as the literature review. The paper should also include the description of the ATA and its initiatives more broadly (section 1.1.) .
The separate section Methodology should be included with the formulated hypotheses.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on how our manuscript could be improved. My coauthor and I have revised our manuscript following your good comments. Please see the attachment!
Best regards!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
The article submitted for review contains the results of an interesting study that is valuable because of its size and geographical context. To improve the quality of the article, the authors should consider complementing the presentation of results (analysis) with some quantitative information. The applied procedure cannot be a black box from which only final conclusions are drawn. The reader should learn about the estimation of significance (frequency of occurrence) of different analysed factors. Even if such variables were not directly examined, they must be referred to in the discussion.
Congratulations on a very interesting text.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments on how our manuscript could be improved. My coauthor and I have revised our manuscript following your good comments. Please see the attachment!
Best regards!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for incorporating the remarks which substantially improve the paper.
