1. As the reviewer pointed out, this study collected a large bulk of data to assess the water footprint. It is not the new thing in term of methodology, not even in term of data itself (because the data is not ‘created’ by the authors). But it is the new thing in term of water footprint assessment using new dataset especially for China (an important agricultural country), which adds some valuable information to the literature. Also, the referees' comments and authors' comments raised some opposite opinions about concept of water footprint and the procedure for data processing (e.g., spatial interpolation). Regarding this, I would like to decide a major revision and afterward will solicit more referees to review the manuscript.
2. I think the authors should pay enough attention to all the referees' comments during revision. I would also like to highlight the following issues for the authors’ reference:
1) The title of manuscript should be carefully revised to reflect precisely the content of the study;
2) Clarify the methodology to calculate water footprint, and clearly distinguish the concept adopted in the manuscript from the existing ones. Highlight the rationality of your concept and procedure;
3) More deep discussions on the results are necessary, e.g., comparison to the literature values and implications for practical water resources management;
4) Improve the English significantly. Please also pay attention to the language like spelling and grammar in the future comments.
Thank you.

Please consider the further comments from the anonymous reviewers and substantially revise the manuscript accordingly.

1）The response to comment #4 is not clear enough to me. Please clarify it.
2) Why do you use m/kg for total water use per unit yield of crop in this paper? I noticed that you used m^3 / kg in your another paper published in water resources management. In my mind, the m/kg is non-indicative for the readers to understand water footprint issue. Please revise.
3) Some spelling of units are confusing in the table, like kgha^-1, tha^-1, please comply with hess's rule.
4) The language should still be SIGNIFICANTLY improved for final publication.