Agricultural and Foodstuff Trade between EU28 and Russia: (Non)Uniformity of the Russian Import Ban Impact Distribution
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic of the article is interesting and topical.
The purpose of the research was clearly specified in the Introduction.
The literature review was correctly performed, based on well-selected and up-to-date literature, which helped the Authors to present the impact of the ban on imports of agricultural and food products from Russia on the EU 28.
The article is well structured and the analysis is based on current data.
The international political events of 2014 have clearly influenced the economic exchanges between Russia and the countries of the European Union (EU 28).
Through the analysis carried out by the authors, we are able to identify the differences between the states of the European Union in relation to the effects of import and export bans with Russia.
The conclusions of the study are valuable and open new directions of research.
Congratulations to the authors for their efforts.
I would suggest making some changes which are listed below.
1. Arrange the article according to the rules of the journal.
References: References must be numbered in order of appearance in the text (including table captions and figure legends) and listed individually at the end of the manuscript. …… .. In the text, reference numbers should be placed in square brackets [], and placed before the punctuation; for example [1], [1–3] or [1,3]. For embedded citations in the text with pagination, use both parentheses and brackets to indicate the reference number and page numbers; for example [5] (p. 10). or [6] (pp. 101–105).
2. I suggest you to present the limitations of your study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This article is very relevant for the journal topics also because of a cutting edge analysis on the Agricultural and Foodstuff trade.
I'm very supportive of this paper's aims and appreciate the clear writing throughout the paper. The paper has many strengths and some opportunities for improvement. For example, the author might reinforce the conclusion/discussions with respect practical and financial implications. Line 34-35 the authors stated: “...a ban on long-term financing for selected state-owned Russian banks and companies..”. The author could provide reference on this aspect also in general terms by considering bank-firm relationshing and green investments (see http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2018/Volume38/EB-18-V38-I4-P203.pdf) and the relevance of green and “rural” finance also in agriculture. Please see: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X16000449
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This is an interesting and well-established study of the EU-Russia agricultural trade. Still, I would like to make the following recommendations on potential improvement of the quality of this paper and its contribution to the literature.
First, the results obtained by the author need a more comprehensive discussion. It would be good to establish a separate section for the discussion of how the author's results correlate with previous studies on EU-Russia trade. The scope of academic literature captured in this paper is rather poor. I would suggest addressing more studies, comparing the results, and critically discussing agreements and disagreements.
Second, such a discussion should be elevated to a higher level and generalized. Russia's import ban is a specific case, its impacts on trade could be noticeable to Russia and some largest trade partners of Russia. However, it would be good to use this case to generalize the discussion and show how trade restrictions could 1) affect trade and transform trade patterns (structure, geography), 2) affect non-trade issues (for example, shifts in agricultural production), 3) affect food security in terms of availability and accessibility of certain products in the market, 4) affect the stability of food supply and value chains.
Third, proceeding from this wider view of the topic, the author could address agricultural production (to bring the paper closer to the scope of the journal). Since the mid-2010, the agricultural sector in Russia has been growing. It would be interesting to see to what extent the import ban has triggered that growth. Again, this case could be used to draw a wider picture - do trade restrictions benefit domestic farmers and domestic consumers? How stable, sustainable, and resource-efficient such trade-production frameworks could be?
Fourth, the abstract and introduction should be revised to reflect this focus of the paper: 1) more attention to the overall relevance of the topic for other countries and communities except for Russia and EU, 2) capture of production-related issues, 3) food security concerns (the effects could be tracked in all four food security pillars, I think). Also, the implications of the study for academic literature and practice should be separately emphasized in the conclusion
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The material has been improved in accordance with the suggestions submitted previously.
Reviewer 3 Report
My recommendations have been addressed
