Blockchain Technology toward Creating a Smart Local Food Supply Chain

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper, the authors describe a possible use of blockchain technology in the food supply chain as a niche of the food industry.

The issue considered by the authors is very interesting and has also been much discussed in the recent past. Therefore, the authors should make an additional effort to indicate what is new and what is analogous to related approaches proposed in the past literature. I would therefore suggest that the authors include a "Discussion" section in which addressing this issue.

An extremely important issue to be addressed in the use of blockchain is that of privacy. Also in the "Discussion" section, I would suggest that the authors include a subsection to indicate how their approach might address this issue. Regarding this, the authors could consider the approaches described in the following papers "A Privacy-Preserving Approach to Prevent Feature Disclosure in an IoT scenario" and "A Two-tier blockchain framework to increase protection and autonomy of smart objects in the IoT." These two approaches were designed for the IoT context but can be easily applied to the context considered by the authors as well. Clearly, in addition to these two approaches, the authors should/could consider others proposed in the recent past.

Author Response

Dear reviewer

First of all, thank you for giving us excellent comments to increase the quality of our paper. According to your comments we have:

1. Added several sentences in the Discussion part showing what is new and what is analogues to approaches proposed in the past literature – why we have chosen this approach for our paper
2. Added part in Discussion in which we have considered the issue of the privacy protection from different approaches and pointed potential use in our model.  We have looked at suggested papers and some additional ones – therefore the list of our references is increased for further 10 sources. We would like to thank you for giving us a direction for further research.
3. Also, we have added potential future research topics in the conclusion based on the privacy protection discussion.

Reviewer 2 Report

 

 

Journal: Computers (ISSN 2073-431X)

Manuscript ID: computers-1768238

Type: Review

Title: Blockchain technology toward creating a smart local food supply chain

Authors: Jovanka Damoska Sekuloska , Aleksandar Erceg *

Section: Blockchain Infrastructures and Enabled Applications

Special Issue: Blockchain-Based Systems

 

Dear Authors,

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to read your paper “ Blockchain technology toward creating a smart local food supply chain”.

 

The primary purpose of the supply chains is to ensure and secure the availability and smooth flow of the necessary resources for efficient production processes and consumption.

The problem described in the article is relevant, because supply chain ac-tivities have been experiencing significant changes due to the importance and creation of the integrated process.

Blockchain is viewed as an innovative tool for transforming supply chain management's (SCM's) actual business model; on the other hand, the SCM provides an applicative value of blockchain technology.

………………….

The topic is actual and of interest. Title is clear and appropriate to the paper’s subject matter.

The research area is identified clearly. Keywords are proper.

The individual sections in which the authors presents his views and suggestions are arranged in a logical manner. They create clarity and readability of the exhibition.

The goals of the paper are clearly defined.

Clearness of task formulating of the subject of matter is clearly stated.

The hypothesis and/or arguments are clearly analyzed and support the presented results and discussion.

The research methodology is appropriate.

Research results are presented objectively and logically using 3 tables and 4 figures.

Conclusions are correctly and logically derived from the evidence and/or arguments, presented data.

The authors has chosen the appropriate way to explain themselves using adequate material from accessible and standard sources. The study is based on a source material consisting of 106 sources of a condensed and periodical nature. Source documentation linked to own descriptions and characteristics exhibits competence and takes account of the global achievements dealing with the discussed issues.

The article is interesting, it introduces an idea that is promising and the its’ content is strong, both theoretically and practically.

The article has a logic structure and the methods used by the authors are clearly explained and presented. Results of the study are properly discussed and sufficiently avoid misinterpretation.

 

…………………..

I believe that this paper will be of interest to the readership of your journal because the research is focused on examining the influence of blockchain technology on the increasing efficiency, transparency, auditability, traceability, and security issues of the food supply chain (FSC), with particular attention to the local food supply chain (LFSC). The main objective of the research is to suggest the implementation of blockchain technology in the local food supply chain as a niche of the food industry.

The result of the research is the identification of a three layers model of a smart local food supply chain. The model provides efficient and more transparent tracking across the local food supply chain, improving food accessibility, traceability, and safety.

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for your review of our paper. As we could see that you didn't ask for the further changes we have improved our paper based on the comments from other reviewers. And we do hope that the new version of the paper will be also interesting for reading as the first one.

Thank you again

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for submitting a very relevant text. Here are my comments:

1. After line 49, please add two paragraphs:

    - one defining the research gap in the existing literature;

   - one describing the aim of your research.

2. I would suggest using the same font in the figures as in the text.

3. Please quote the source in Figure 3.

4. Please quote the source in Figure 4.

5. Please consider how to make Figure 4 more illustrative and precise. 

Good luck with the publishing process.

Best regards,

The reviewer

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

First of all, thank you for your kind comments used to prepare a better paper. Here are the answers to your comments:

1. We have added a few sentences as proposed after line 49 in our paper stating what is the research gap in the existing literature and describing the aim of our research.
2. We have changed the fonts in all pictures, so they are now the same as the font used for the text
3. We made the Figure 3, so we have added authors as a source
4. We made the Figure 4, so we have added authors as a source
5. We updated Figure 4 to be more precise

All changes can be seen through Track changes functions.

Thank you again 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have complied with my previous suggestions. Therefore, in my opinion, the paper can be accepted.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors presented the review on develo** a smart food supply chain using blockchain technology. The paper needs major revision considering the following suggestions.

 

1. The abstract in its current form is too superficial, and the abstract needs to rewrite to point out the significance and impact of the paper.
2. The authors should report a review of the existing literature on the smart food supply chain that deals with blockchain technology. The current paper submission work should be positioned within this literature and the authors should show exactly what they add to existing approaches and why this is relevant.
3. The methodology (Research Method) is unclear. I recommend adopting any suitable systematic approach for the review. It may include qualitative analysis as well.
4. Most of the references are from reports available online. It is strongly recommended to consider more references from highly prestige journal articles.
5. Include some more references from 2022-2021.
6. The conclusion section should be rewritten to:
   (1) discuss research contributions in informatics, blockchain technology and indicate practical advantages (in at least one separate paragraph), 
   (2) discuss research limitations (at least one separate paragraph), and 
   (3) supply 4-5 solid and insightful future research suggestions in smart food supply chain and blockchain technology (in at least one separate paragraph).
7. Overall, the research contribution is very limited. It should clearly highlight the current trends and future directions in blockchain technology for the smart food supply chain.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is very updated in the topics of the fourth industrial revolution, it is developed in a very clear way by the authors.
Some recommendations are made to have more clarity and reflect on some additional conclusions beyond the context in which the paper has been written.

 

Abstract:  Line 16: change the first capital letter of Food to food.

Line 136: use semicolon (;) to separate (i) single-use; (ii) localization; (iii) substitution; and (iv) transformation.

Line 139: Figure 1: It is recommended that figures be in shades of gray to avoid unreadable backgrounds, blue as background loses black letters.

Line 161: The monetary value in which it is defined: US dollars? Francs,? at $93.16 million of ..... revise all lines where money is used (line 227)

Line 175: Please change Food per food supply chain management, same on line 255; Line 339 change Local per local food ....

Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4: the figures should comply with the quality required by the magazine is blurred, it is recommended to work in vectors. 

Table 2: Check if the texts should be centered according to the rules of the journal, Table 1, has a different format than Table 2, the same case for Table 3.

Line 366: Please, define C2B, B2C, and B2B

Line 394 to 411: Please separate into two paragraphs, should have paragraphs of up to 15 lines.

Conclusions: how could LFSC be included in other countries such as Latin America, are they replicable, and what would be required?

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for your research, which adds to the fields of blockchain applications, food supply chains and supply chain management.

Find a number of comments below:

General comment:

The article provides a lot of interesting research on blockchains and their applications. The food supply chain is a particularly interesting field of application for blockchain technologies. However, it remains unclear to this reviewer, what exactly is the novelty in the blockchain model developed in the article and in which way it goes beyond existing models.

Some sections on blockchain are repetitive and read a bit too euphoric. Please delete repetitive text sections, formulate blockchain descriptions in more neutral language and provide sources for blockchain capabilities.

Figures: figures should provide more detail (see comments in the specific questions below)

Language: English language needs improvement. If possible, consider consulting a native speaker.

Abstract: Please reformulate and (briefly) address the following questions:

• What is the original (new) contribution of this article, in particular, the developed model?
• What is the benefit from this model?
• Do not use acronyms (like SCM and LFSC) in the abstract that are introduced only in the main text below.

Specific comments to the main text:

Line(s) 37-44: Please provide one or several sources for these remarks (claims on blockchain).

Line 99-100: “blockchain application in SCM attracted only minor research interest [15]” à this reviewer would question that statement, as there are lots of articles on blockchain applications available.

Line 139, Figure 1: What is the advantage of showing this figure? The information contained in Figure 1 can also be presented more briefly in the text.

Line 207, Figure 2. Blockchain in FSCM [62]: please provide a legend that explains the meaning of the various symbols used in this figures.

Line 284, Figure 3. Three-layer model of Blockchain-based FSC: the figure does not show the three layers mentioned in the etxt (line 278-280) and mentioned in the caption.

Section 4. Blockchain model of Food supply chain management (FSCM). Please provide – either in chapter 4 or in chapter 6. Discussion – some information on what exactly is new with your developed blockchain model and how it adds to the research literature on blockchains.

Line 356, Figure 4. Figure 4. Implementation of Blockchain technology in Local food supply chain – LFSC: The figure is not specific enough, does not provide any specific information on implementation. Please provide more detail on implementation in the figure.

Reviewer 4 Report

The authors present an overview of the current state of Blockchain Technology in the supply chain, and speculate on the value of its application in a local food supply chain.

The authors do a comprehensive review of the literature on blockchain in the supply chain, and the digital supply chain more generally. Unfortunately, this paper does not provide a novel contribution. While it is intended as a review of the existing literature, rather than original research, it still lacks any sort of conclusions or meta-analysis that would justify publication. The “case study” that makes up part 5 consists only of references to other publications, and there is neither a sufficient number of examples nor analysis/insight that to comprise a novel contribution.

The authors have extensively presented many of the advantages and disadvantages of blockchain in the supply chain, as well as use case exemplars, but overall this reads as an introductory textbook chapter rather than a journal publication.