Peer Review Record

Manuscript ID: JOSTA-202609-481D

Article Title: Linkage of Stakeholder Influence and Constraints on the Income Diversification of Coconut Farmers through Value Addition

Double-anonymous review Accepted

Review Summary

Item	Details
Submission Date	18 September 2026
Editorial Screening	Completed
External Reviewers	2
Review Rounds	2
Revision Type	Minor Revision
Final Decision	Accepted
Acceptance Date	05 October 2026

Editorial Assessment

The manuscript addresses a relevant research problem using an appropriate methodology, examining stakeholder influence and constraints on income diversification among coconut farmers through value addition. The reviewers noted that the Materials and Methods section was not clearly explained and lacked structural organisation, that the Results section needed stronger grounding in relevant literature to establish external validity, and that the logical flow of the article broke down at several points. Specific concerns included the need to update outdated global data alongside more recent national figures, a clearer explanation of the sampling design and rationale for district and farmer selection, inclusion of the respondents' basic profile (including income) given the study's focus on income diversification, and sharper alignment of the Results section with diversification- and value-addition-specific constraints rather than general production constraints. The reviewers also recommended district-wise reporting of results and a more substantive Conclusion section covering the study's unique contributions, methodological strengths and limitations, and future research directions. The authors satisfactorily addressed all comments, after which the manuscript was accepted for publication.

Review Timeline

Submission Received

18 September 2026

Manuscript submitted through the JOSTA submission portal.

Editorial Screening Completed

20 September 2026

Manuscript passed preliminary editorial checks.

Peer Review Initiated

22 September 2026

Two independent reviewers accepted the review assignment.

Reviewer Reports Received

29 September 2026

Reviewers recommended publication following minor revision.

Revised Manuscript Received

03 October 2026

Authors submitted a revised version addressing reviewer concerns.

Final Decision

05 October 2026

Accepted for publication.

Published Online

07 October 2026

Article published in Volume 2, Issue 4.

Key Issues Addressed During Revision

Reviewer concerns are summarised by category. Specific comments and author responses are confidential.

Category	Nature of Concern	Status
Materials & Methods – Structure & Clarity	Materials and Methods section reorganised into clearly defined subsections with improved explanation	✓ Addressed
Introduction – Research Gap & Data Currency	Additional supporting evidence provided to emphasise the research gap; global share figures (previously 2019) updated to align with the more recent national data (2024–25) used elsewhere in the manuscript	✓ Addressed
Methodology – Sampling Design	Sampling design clearly explained, including the rationale for selecting the three districts, the sampling frame for farmers, how the 30 farmers per district were selected (covering holding size, coconut-cultivation experience, and value-addition participation), and an explicit statement of whether sample selection was purposive or random	✓ Addressed
Respondent Profile – Income & Demographic Context	Basic profile of sample respondents, including income data, included to give readers the context needed given the study's focus on income diversification	✓ Addressed
Results – Alignment with Diversification Focus	Table 3 and related Results content revised to focus on diversification- and value-addition-related constraints rather than general coconut-production constraints; clarified whether the 90 farmers practise value addition, with corresponding income data reported	✓ Addressed
Results – District-wise Reporting	District-wise results provided to improve clarity in the Discussion and Conclusion	✓ Addressed
Results – External Validity	Results section strengthened with more relevant supporting literature to establish the external validity of the findings	✓ Addressed
Logical Flow & Coherence	Sections revised to resolve breaks in logical flow identified at several points in the manuscript	✓ Addressed
Conclusion – Comprehensive Revamp	Conclusion section revised to include the study's unique contributions/findings, the benefits and limitations of the methodology, and recommended future research directions	✓ Addressed

Peer Review Statement

Journal of Sustainable Technology in Agriculture (JOSTA) employs a double-anonymous peer review process. The identities of authors and reviewers remain mutually confidential throughout the review and publication process. Reviewer reports and correspondence are not published.

Voluntary reviewer disclosure. JOSTA respects reviewers' autonomy regarding attribution. A reviewer who wishes to be identified in the published article may notify the editorial office at any point before final acceptance. Upon written consent, the reviewer's name and affiliation will be acknowledged in the Publication & Reviewer Details section of the article. Reviewers who do not provide consent remain anonymous and are listed as Anonymous. This policy is strictly voluntary; no reviewer is under any obligation to disclose their identity.

This page provides a transparent summary of the editorial and peer-review process in accordance with JOSTA's open-science commitments. It does not constitute a full disclosure of reviewer comments or author responses.