The Impact of Multi-Dimensional Vectors on China’s Agricultural Products Export: Based on fsQCA

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article examines the impact of multiple dimensions of distance (geographical, economic, cultural, institutional) on China's agricultural exports using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). The research question is interesting and relevant given China's position as a major agricultural producer and trader. The use of fsQCA to study configurations of distance factors is a methodological strength. However, there are some limitations that could be addressed:

- The introduction provides a good overview of relevant literature on distance and trade. However, the justification for using fsQCA versus more common methods like gravity models is not clearly explained. The authors could expand on why fsQCA is most appropriate for the research question.

- The sample includes 63 countries but there is no discussion of the sampling strategy or representativeness. Were certain countries excluded? Some justification should be provided.

- The calibration process for assigning fuzzy set membership scores is not thoroughly explained. More details on the thresholds and coding rationale would improve transparency.

- In the results section, the configuration pathways from fsQCA are presented but the substantive interpretation of findings is limited. The authors could provide more discussion of the practical implications of the pathways. 

- The conclusion summarizes the main findings but does not sufficiently address the study's contributions and limitations. situating the findings in the broader literature would be helpful.

- There are some minor grammar issues throughout that need editing for clarity.

Overall, this is a worthwhile study of an important topic using an innovative methodology. Addressing the above issues would strengthen the paper and enhance its contribution to the literature. The results provide interesting insights into multi-dimensional distance and agricultural trade that merit further analysis and discussion.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your great help. The detailed response is attached.

Please see the attachment.

Best regards,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

- In the Title and in the text you use the word "Distance". From my point of view, it is not the best solution (maybe translation). Distance is "the length of the space between two points"; I think you need to find another word. My proposal for example "Vector" . Then, of course, you will need to change the title of your model to "Multi-dimensional vectors".  It will be better if you talk about geographical, economic, cultural, and institutional vectors in the proposed model. Please consider my suggestion. This will make the text easier to understand; 

- What were the aim, main methods, and insights of the research? Now it is not clear (In the Abstract).  As well it is not clear what the problem it is. Do you want to increase the export of agricultural products from China? But you did not show in the Abstract what is the import and export balance of this production.

- It is not clear citation: "When cultural distance is considered in bilateral trade, more culturally-distance trade less?" (78-79)  I think you need to check your English.

- I can't find a description of which products belong to which group ( high-level and non-high-level agricultural products)? This should be placed at the beginning of the article. You did not propose which products and to which countries they can be exported. Is this production enough for China itself?

- In the Conclusions, you need to write how to promote traditional culture and practically increase the export.;

- Why "Discussions" are after "Conclusions". Always it had to be before. But if you need, you can leave like that. (378)

-Did you use all of the sources in the text? So many here (413) 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable comments. They are great to improve the quality of paper. Thank you for your help. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First, I would like to thank the authors for their work. It was interesting to read.

I have just some minor comments.

The abstract should include the main objective/s of the paper, the methodology used, the findings, and the novelty of the research. Also, avoid abbreviations in the abstract if possible. Explain them in the text but not in the abstract.

The abbreviation CAGE is never explained in the text.

It would be great to have some information in the Literature Review section describing the gap in previous research and explaining the need for this new paper.

The Discussion section should be placed before the Conclusion.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your valuable ccomments. They are quite important for us. Thank you for your help.

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf