Editor rejected paper because of insufficient reviews I received a decision notice on a paper this morning. Reviewer 1 gave a positive review, suggesting relatively minor cosmetic adjustments, etc. However, the editor was apparently unable to obtain a second review, replying: 


  ... the Editors have decided that your manuscript cannot be accepted for publication in XXXXX, as we have been unable to secure enough agreements from peer reviewers to examine your submission.


I admit that I'm puzzled by this response, and am curious what if any response from me could be useful. Is it possible that the paper was just not a good fit for the journal? If so, I wish the editor had rejected it right away. I'm curious if anyone has another explanation or suggestions for steps forward. And if the step forward is just "find a different journal" that's kind of what I'm expecting at this point.
It seems to me that the editor asked people to review your article, but not enough people were willing to do so. Apparently, the editor thought your article had enough of a chance not to give you a desk-reject, but your article (or your abstract) was not exciting enough to convince potential reviewers to review it. 

Maybe it is not the article/abstract, but your article is dealing with a very narrow subject, thus limiting the potential reviewers. You had the bad luck that all of those few potential reviewers were all busy. 

I don't think there is much you can do, other than have a good look at the abstract, and see if it is excessively boring. If that is not the case, then you probably just had bad luck.