PSTR-D-21-00062

A systematic map of within-plantation oil palm management practices reveals a rapidly growing but patchy evidence base

PLOS Sustainability and Transformation

Dear Dr. Popkin,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Sustainability and Transformation. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Sustainability and Transformation's publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by . If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at SustainTransform@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pstr/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

* A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

* A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

* An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ze-Chun Yuan

Section Editor

PLOS Sustainability and Transformation

Journal Requirements:

1. Please amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

2. Please ensure that the funders and grant numbers match between the Financial Disclosure field and the Funding Information tab in your submission form. Note that the funders must be provided in the same order in both places as well.

3. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article's retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Sustainability and Transformation’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

--------------------

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

--------------------

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

--------------------

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Sustainability and Transformation does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

--------------------

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Although oil palm expansion has had severe environmental impacts, within-plantation oil palm management practices do present a lot of the potential to support high levels of biodiversity, ecological sustenance and ecosystem functioning with minimal chemical inputs that promote improvement in soil quality and ambient environmental conditions. Founded on the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and the Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) certification schemes (that mandate the standards for within-country oil palm cultivation in Indonesia and Malaysia, respectively), this Paper presents a good explorative methodology (i.e., ‘systematic mapping’ using PICOS algorithm, incorporating protocols like that of CEE, RoSES, Cambridge Conservation Evidence Guidelines, etc.) to identify key trends in the research published on 'within-plantation' oil palm management efforts and field-scale outcomes. The search string to identify benchmark papers (as listed in Table S1) upon selective elimination of miscellaneous terms/keywords to distinguish relevant and full-fledged articles has been done with good precision. The review tries to categorize the articles as R-CI and R-BACI based on the type of research experiment that has been tested and implemented (i.e., randomized control, most common study design and the least common study design). The Paper concludes with a noteworthy observation of the various ‘outcomes’ of the articles (i.e., soil fertility, soil erosion, water quality and availability, pest control, replanting or buffer zones, high conservation value indices, carbon sequestration and waste management scenarios) and the research/thematic gaps that make environmental management efforts incongruent and disharmonious.

Overall, the conceptualization and presentation of the review is very good, and has also been portrayed well by the PRISMA flowchart and R/Rstudio data plots. However, although the analysis has ruled out the broader importance of agricultural and land management practices for experiment-design segregations, the role of regional climate patterns and sociological participation in transforming redundant agricultural policies into the ‘outcome’ oriented farming culture cannot be fully ignored. More so, this aspect is of special significance in Southeast Asia due to drastic climate change impacts and political upheavals. If possible, this perspective should also be explored a little more and mentioned accordingly in the ‘Limitations’ section. From my side, I therefore recommend this minor revision with a goodwill to enhance this Article’s readership for scholars and policy makers in Asia. An overview of the following suggestive references may help attain this crucial note, which would be sufficient in 5-6 sentences. These are good and reliable Papers, and are not necessarily gray literature, irrespective of their Indexing status.

Teng, P.S., & Oliveros, J.A.P. (2016). The Enabling Environment for Inclusive Agribusiness in Southeast Asia. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, 13(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.258846

Chandra, A., Dargusch, P., McNamara, K.E., Caspe, A.M., & Dalabajan, D. (2017). A Study of Climate-Smart Farming Practices and Climate-resiliency Field Schools in Mindanao, the Philippines. World Development, 98, 214–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.04.028

Wang, S.W., Lee, W.-K., & Son, Y. (2017). An assessment of climate change impacts and adaptation in South Asian agriculture. International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 9(4), 517–534. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-05-2016-0069

Kamaruddin, R., Abdullah, N., & Ayob, M.A. (2018). Determinants of job satisfaction among Malaysian youth working in the oil palm plantation sector. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 8(4), 678–692. https://doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-06-2017-0063

Shehu, S., & Salleh, M.A. (2020). Contributing factors to Malaysian sustainability on palm oil. Asian People Journal, 3(1), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.37231/apj.2020.3.1.165

Ahmed, A., Mohd Y.B.I., & Abdullah A.M. (2021). Oil palm in the face of climate change: A review of recommendations. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 646(1), 012065. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/646/1/012065

Wardhani, R., & Rahadian, Y. (2021). Sustainability strategy of Indonesian and Malaysian palm oil industry: a qualitative analysis. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(5), 1077–1107. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2020-0259

Sakai, K., Hassan, M.A., Vairappan, C.S., & Shirai, Y. (2022). Promotion of a green economy with the palm oil industry for biodiversity conservation: A touchstone toward a sustainable bioindustry. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 133(5), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2022.01.001

Reviewer #2: The authors used a systematic mapping approach adapted from systematic review protocols, to collate and catalogued oil palm management publications to provide details of geographic location, year, interventions tested, targeted outcomes of interventions, co-occurrences between different interventions and outcomes, and study design. The findings of this study could be useful and beneficial to the research community and stakeholders.

This manuscript is very similar to a recently published paper:

Xiao Jian Tan, Wai Loon Cheor, Kwok Shien Yeo, Wai Zhe Leow, Expert systems in oil palm precision agriculture: A decade systematic review, Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, Volume 34, Issue 4, 2022, Pages 1569-1594, ISSN 1319-1578, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2022.02.006.

This manuscript could be accepted to publish after the authors point out innovations and differences in this article, update and appropriately revise.

Reviewer #3: Recommendation: Minor revision

The current review reports an interesting topic pointing out that systematic map of within-plantation oil palm management practices reveals a rapidly growing but patchy evidence base. The manuscript shows no adjustments needed in terms of its standard English; it is perfectly written. The concept is novel and the manuscript’s scientific quality is excellent.

The Abstract part is clear; minor adjustments are only needed regarding the use of the first voice form in sentences. Keywords should be added after the Abstract body as they are lacking. An author summary needs to be added just after the Abstract part according to the journal’s guidelines. The Introduction is well structured and aiming. The main concerns in this part are some sentences reformulation in the impersonal form and the adjustments of in-text references following the journal’s guidelines. On the other hand, all the aims of the current study are perfectly clear and well attained. The Methods part shows a good structure, is well aiming and all needed information are well provided. However, some sentences reformulation is needed due to the use of the first voice form besides some in-text references adjustments following the journal’s guidelines. The Results part is well structured and very clear. Only one sentence needs to be reformulated in the impersonal form. The Discussion pat is well aiming and well structured. It shows reliable information on which the authors were based to describe their point of view. As in the previous parts, only some sentences reformulation in the impersonal form is needed besides the adjustment of in-text references form following the journal’s guidelines. The Limitations part is clear and well aiming. Only some sentences reformulation is needed. The Conclusions part is well aiming and clear. However, some sentences reformulation is also needed in this part.

Briefly, based on all presented clarifications, I find that the manuscript shows a big merit to be published in “PLOS Sustainability and Transformation” once all raised points, recommendations and suggestions are well addressed by the author.

Abstract

1) Page 1, lines 32–57: The Abstract part is clear; minor adjustments are only needed regarding the use of the first voice form in sentences. Keywords should be added after the Abstract body as they are lacking.

2) Page 2, lines 37–42: “In this… design”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of these sentences and adopt the impersonal form instead.

3) Page 2, lines 53–56: “We match… management”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

4) Keywords, Page 2, line 58: Kindly provide keywords just after the Abstract body.

Author summary

1) Page 2, line 58: An author summary needs to be added just after the Abstract part according to the journal’s guidelines. However, it lacks in the current study; accordingly, kindly provide it.

1. Introduction

1) Pages 2–5, lines 61–190: The Introduction is well structured and aiming. The main concerns in this part are some sentences reformulation in the impersonal form and the adjustments of in-text references following the journal’s guidelines. On the other hand, all the aims of the current study are perfectly clear and well attained.

2) Potential for sustainable management of oil palm: Page 2, lines 67–71: “Oil… [5]”: The sentence is long and a little bit cumbersome; accordingly, kindly reformulate in order to make it more concise, clearer and more aiming.

3) Potential for sustainable management of oil palm: Page 2, line 71: Kindly remove “Older”.

4) Potential for sustainable management of oil palm: Page 2, line 77: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[6–8]”.

5) Potential for sustainable management of oil palm: Page 3, lines 88–89: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[15,16]” and “[17,18]”.

6) Potential for sustainable management of oil palm: Page 3, lines 93–97: “Additional… [23–25]”: The sentence is long and heavy; accordingly, kindly reformulate in order to make it more concise, clearer and more aiming.

7) Oil palm sustainability schemes: Page 3, line 112: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[27,28]”.

8) Oil palm sustainability schemes: Page 3, line 113: Kindly adjust as follow: “non-profit organization”.

9) Oil palm sustainability schemes: Page 3, line 119: Kindly remove “[30-31]” as you already mentioned them above so the reader can easily understand that.

10) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, line 143: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[33,34]”.

11) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, line 145: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[38,39]”.

12) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, line 147: Kindly remove “see, for example, those listed in”.

13) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, lines 157–158: “In this… outcomes”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

14) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, lines 166–168: “In our… factors”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

15) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, line 168: Kindly adjust as follow: “The second”.

16) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 4, line 171: Kindly adjust as follow: “the current systematic”.

17) Current state of oil palm plantation management research: Page 5, lines 184–190: “From… study”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of these sentences and adopt the impersonal form instead.

2. Methods

1) Pages 5–8, lines 194–365: The Methods part shows a good structure, is well aiming and all needed information are well provided. However, some sentences reformulation is needed due to the use of the first voice form besides some in-text references adjustments following the journal’s guidelines.

2) Systematic mapping approach: Page 5, lines 195–199: “We used… study”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

3) Systematic mapping approach: Page 5, line 199: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current stepwise approach”.

4) Determining search string: Page 5, line 204: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current search”.

5) Determining search string: Page 5, lines 207–208: “Before… (S1 Table)”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

6) Determining search string: Page 5, lines 209–211: “To set… literature”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

7) Determining search string: Page 5, lines 212–215: “Using… results”: Same recommendation as in the previous two comments.

8) Search sources: Page 6, lines 228–232: “We also… [49]”: Same recommendation as in the previous comments.

9) Search sources: Page 6, line 233: Kindly remove “our”.

10) Inclusion/Exclusion criteria: Page 6, lines 238–239: “We assessed… [50]”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

11) Inclusion/Exclusion criteria: Page 6, lines 247–250: “As we… ecosystems”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

12) Inclusion/Exclusion criteria: Page 6, lines 259–261: “We provide… [51-52]”: Same recommendation as in the previous two comments. Moreover, kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[51,52]”.

13) Inclusion/Exclusion criteria: Page 6, lines 263–265: “We also… (S2 file)”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

14) Meta-data classification: Page 7, line 276: Kindly remove “2014”.

15) Meta-data classification: Page 7, lines 277–281: “Publications… interventions”: The sentence is long and a little bit cumbersome; accordingly, kindly reformulate in order to make it more concise, clearer and more aiming.

16) Meta-data classification: Page 7, lines 284–287: “We chose… intervention”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

17) Meta-data classification: Page 7, lines 293–294: “we provide… S2 file”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

18) Meta-data classification: Page 7, lines 297–300: “We identified… checking”: Same recommendation as in the previous two comments.

19) Meta-data classification: Page 7, lines 303–305: “By cross-referencing… (S4 Table)”: Same recommendation as in the previous comments.

20) Meta-data classification: Page 7, line 316: “We considered… outcome”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

21) Meta-data classification: Page 8, lines 325–331: “Therefore… (S4 Table)”: Same recommendation as in the previous comment.

22) Meta-data classification: Page 8, line 332: Kindly remove “2020” and adjust as follow: “The study”.

23) Meta-data classification: Page 8, line 335: Kindly adjust as follow: “Non-randomized”.

24) Meta-data classification: Page 8, line 343: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[42, 57, 58]” and adjust as follow: “Christie et al. [42]”.

25) Meta-data classification: Page 8, line 346: Kindly remove “[42]”.

26) Consistency checking: Page 8, lines 357–358: “Through… categories”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

3. Results

1) Pages 9–12, lines 368–542: The Results part is well structured and very clear. Only one sentence needs to be reformulated in the impersonal form.

2) Study locations: Page 9, line 398: Kindly adjust as follow: “The number”.

3) Study interventions: Page 9, lines 410–412: “We identified… (see S4 Table)”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

4. Discussion

1) Pages 12–16, lines 546–747: The Discussion pat is well aiming and well structured. It shows reliable information on which the authors were based to describe their point of view. As in the previous parts, only some sentences reformulation in the impersonal form is needed besides the adjustment of in-text references form following the journal’s guidelines.

2) Study locations: Page 12, line 550: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[69,70]”.

3) Study locations: Page 12, lines 554–555: “Although… 2015”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

4) Study locations: Page 13, line 563: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[27,28,73]”.

5) Study locations: Page 13, lines 563–566: “Oil… [75–77]”: Kindly avoid the first voice of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

6) Trends in intervention-testing studies and their targeted outcomes: Page 13, line 588: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[82,83]”.

7) Trends in intervention-testing studies and their targeted outcomes: Page 13, line 595: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[84,85]”.

8) Trends in intervention-testing studies and their targeted outcomes: Page 13, line 599: Kindly adjust as follow: “the current map”.

9) Trends in intervention-testing studies and their targeted outcomes: Page 13, line 607: Kindly remove “see for example”.

10) Trends in intervention-testing studies and their targeted outcomes: Page 13, line 610: Same recommendation as in the previous comment. Moreover, kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[93,94]”.

11) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 616: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current map”.

12) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 619: Kindly remove “For example”.

13) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 624: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[96,97]”.

14) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 628: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[98,99]”.

15) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 633: Kindly adjust as follow: “the current map”.

16) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, lines 642–643: “We found… studies”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

17) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, lines 645–646: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[101,102]” and “[106,107]”.

18) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 14, line 653: Kindly adjust the in-text reference form as follow: “[113,114]”.

19) Few studies addressing GHG emissions: Page 15, lines 666–668: “Because… interventions”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

20) Trends in multiple outcome studies: Page 15, line 670: Kindly remove “see for example” and adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[121,122]”.

21) Replanting studies: few studies to support current replanting plans: Page 15, line 679: Kindly adjust as follow: “500000 ha”.

22) Study designs for oil palm management decision-making: Page 15, lines 698 and 701: Kindly adjust the in-text reference form as follow: “[41,42,131]”.

23) Evidence and gaps in evidence supporting sustainability criteria: Page 16, line 740: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current systematic”.

24) Evidence and gaps in evidence supporting sustainability criteria: Page 16, line 747: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[135,136]”.

5. Limitations

1) Pages 16–17, lines 751–767: The Limitations part is clear and well aiming. Only some sentences reformulation is needed.

2) Page 16, lines 752–753: “We also… production”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

3) Page 16, line 756: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current map”.

4) Page 17, lines 761–765: “Mapping… another”: The sentence is long and heavy; accordingly, kindly reformulate in order to make it more concise, clearer and more aiming.

5) Page 17, line 767: Kindly adjust the in-text references form as follow: “[138,139]”.

6. Conclusions

1) Page 17, lines 769–792: The Conclusions part is well aiming and clear. However, some sentences reformulation is also needed in this part.

2) Page 17, lines 775–779: “In our… researchers”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of these sentences and adopt the impersonal form instead.

3) Page 17, line 786: Kindly adjust as follow: “The current findings”.

4) Page 17, lines 787–790: “To provide… India”: Kindly avoid the first voice form of the sentence and adopt the impersonal form instead.

--------------------

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Soumyajit Koley

Reviewer #2: Yes: Shaorong Chen

Reviewer #3: No

--------------------

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

A systematic map of within-plantation oil palm management practices reveals a rapidly growing but patchy evidence base

PSTR-D-21-00062R1

Dear Ms. Popkin,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'A systematic map of within-plantation oil palm management practices reveals a rapidly growing but patchy evidence base' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Sustainability and Transformation.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow-up email from a member of our team. 

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact SustainTransform@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Sustainability and Transformation.

Best regards,

Ze-Chun Yuan

Section Editor

PLOS Sustainability and Transformation

***********************************************************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):