Developing a Model of Insurance Securitisation in Iranian Environmental Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1.    In line 126: "A survey of studies conducted in Iran revealed that Iran is one of the ten most acci-126 dent-prone countries globally". Please provide a reference.

2.    In line 184, the sentence:" Today, insurance companies face different risks depending on their insurance to investors. Hence, these companies seek ways to transfer their risk" is vague. Please clarify.

3.    Figure 3 needs some clarification. Please explain in words what can be learned from this figure. What is the outcome of the research and what is pre-assumed in the methodology? What is the alternative hypothesis? Also, the figure should be squeezed to fit the paper size.

 

4.    The questions in Appendix 2 are not translated correctly, and there are numerous grammatical mistakes. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your good comments on the paper, further all comments are incorporated in the current version as follow:

1. In line 126: "A survey of studies conducted in Iran revealed that Iran is one of the ten most accident-prone countries globally". Please provide a reference.

Response: the related reference is provided.

2. In line 184, the sentence:" Today, insurance companies face different risks depending on their insurance to investors. Hence, these companies seek ways to transfer their risk" is vague. Please clarify.

Response: additional definitions and elaborations are added to make the sentence more apparent.

3. Figure 3 needs some clarification. Please explain in words what can be learned from this figure. What is the outcome of the research and what is pre-assumed in the methodology? What is the alternative hypothesis? Also, the figure should be squeezed to fit the paper size.

 Response: Since Figures 2 and 3 were overlapped, in which figure 3 does not provide additional information to the readers, figure 3 is omitted and the findings pertaining the figure 3 are discussed and elaborated. Moreover, figure 2 is organized and fitted according to the paper size.

4. The questions in Appendix 2 are not translated correctly, and there are numerous grammatical mistakes. 

Response: Appendix 2 is reviewed and all its grammatical mistakes are corrected.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thanks for the opportunity to review this interesting and significant paper. This paper is easy to read and I believe there will be large audience. I have read the entire manuscript carefully and I have a few comments and suggestions for its authors:

-        Would you please, included a new section literature review, after introduction, mentioning some solid references too. Further on, I suggest the addition of the following references: Cowley, A., & Cummins, J. D. (2005). Securitization of life insurance assets and liabilities. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 72(2), 193-226, Doherty, N. A., & Schlesinger, H. (2002). Insurance contracts and securitization. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 69(1), 45-62., Hagendorff, B., Hagendorff, J., Keasey, K., & Gonzalez, A. (2014). The risk implications of insurance securitization: The case of catastrophe bonds. Journal of Corporate Finance, 25, 387-402., Dragos, S. L., Dragos, C. M., & Muresan, G. M. (2020). From intention to decision in purchasing life insurance and private pensions: Different effects of knowledge and behavioural factors. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 87, 101555., Fringuellotti, F., & Santos, J. A. (2021). Insurance Companies and the Growth of Corporate Loans' Securitization. FRB of New York Staff Report, (975). etc

I believe the methodology used by the authors is appropriate. Still, I think the authors should mention the year of the study both in the abstract and in the data section.

Author Response

Dera Reviewer,

Thank you for your effort in reviewing the paper. The comments are affected to the paper as follows:

Thanks for the opportunity to review this interesting and significant paper. This paper is easy to read and I believe there will be large audience. I have read the entire manuscript carefully and I have a few comments and suggestions for its authors:

-        Would you please, included a new section literature review, after introduction, mentioning some solid references too. Further on, I suggest the addition of the following references: Cowley, A., & Cummins, J. D. (2005). Securitization of life insurance assets and liabilities. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 72(2), 193-226, Doherty, N. A., & Schlesinger, H. (2002). Insurance contracts and securitization. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 69(1), 45-62., Hagendorff, B., Hagendorff, J., Keasey, K., & Gonzalez, A. (2014). The risk implications of insurance securitization: The case of catastrophe bonds. Journal of Corporate Finance, 25, 387-402., Dragos, S. L., Dragos, C. M., & Muresan, G. M. (2020). From intention to decision in purchasing life insurance and private pensions: Different effects of knowledge and behavioural factors. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 87, 101555., Fringuellotti, F., & Santos, J. A. (2021). Insurance Companies and the Growth of Corporate Loans' Securitization. FRB of New York Staff Report, (975). Etc

Response: a new section is added entitled literature review, which contains all the above-mentioned documents.

I believe the methodology used by the authors is appropriate. Still, I think the authors should mention the year of the study both in the abstract and in the data section.

Response: the year of the study is mentioned in the abstract and body of the paper.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors should consider the following recommendations in order to improve the original manuscript:

- The keywords should not overlap with the title of this paper.

- To include certain relevant research questions

- To extend the Theoretical Framework, by providing more relevant literature review, especially studies conducted during the last 5 years. I suggest extending the literature section by including more recent and relevant studies.

- Authors also did not provide sufficient evidence on literature review to support the hypotheses.  Authors should take into consideration much more recent publications in the sphere of discussed subject matter, especially studies conducted during the last 5 years. Please discuss about Covid-19 pandemic caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its impact on economy. I suggest extending the literature section by including recent and relevant studies, such as for instance:

1.      Pourmansouri R, Mehdiabadi A, Shahabi V, Spulbar C, Birau R. An Investigation of the Link between Major Shareholders’ Behavior and Corporate Governance Performance before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of the Companies Listed on the Iranian Stock Market. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2022; 15(5):208. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15050208.

-          To expand the managerial implications in the article.

-          Human proofreading, English grammar and spelling correction are also required in order to improve the quality of the manuscript.

-          The sources must be added under each figure and table.

-          I would also like to see a well-developed discussion comparing and contrasting solution/results presented in the work with existing work and then a subsection of it presenting contributions to theory/knowledge/literature and followed by a subsection on “Implications for practice”.

-          The References section is very poor.

-          Please follow the journal instructions for authors in order to edit this research paper in correct template.

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments on the paper. The paper is revised according to the comments as follows:

The authors should consider the following recommendations in order to improve the original manuscript:

- The keywords should not overlap with the title of this paper.

Response: this section is revised with new keywords.

- To include certain relevant research questions

Research questions are specified.

- To extend the Theoretical Framework, by providing more relevant literature review, especially studies conducted during the last 5 years. I suggest extending the literature section by including more recent and relevant studies.

- Authors also did not provide sufficient evidence on literature review to support the hypotheses.  Authors should take into consideration much more recent publications in the sphere of discussed subject matter, especially studies conducted during the last 5 years. Please discuss about Covid-19 pandemic caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its impact on economy. I suggest extending the literature section by including recent and relevant studies, such as for instance:

1. Pourmansouri R, Mehdiabadi A, Shahabi V, Spulbar C, Birau R. An Investigation of the Link between Major Shareholders’ Behavior and Corporate Governance Performance before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of the Companies Listed on the Iranian Stock Market. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2022; 15(5):208. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15050208.

 

-          To expand the managerial implications in the article.

Response: a new section is added entitled literature review, which contains new and relevant documents, including the above-mentioned one.

-          proofreading, English grammar and spelling correction are also required in order to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Response: some revisions are exerted in this regard.

-          The sources must be added under each figure and table.

Response: the source of tables and figures is mentioned

-          I would also like to see a well-developed discussion comparing and contrasting solution/results presented in the work with existing work and then a subsection of it presenting contributions to theory/knowledge/literature and followed by a subsection on “Implications for practice”.

Response: Further discussions are provided regarding the findings of the paper. Also, a subsection exists under the discussion and conclusion section containing the implications for practice.

-          The References section is very poor.

Response: the reference section is updated, reviewed, and the necessary corrections are made.

-          Please follow the journal instructions for authors in order to edit this research paper in correct template.

Response: this comment is covered.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I want  to congratulate the authors on the revised version.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your effort on the paper

Reviewer 3 Report

The revised paper has been improved based on previous review report.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you very much for your good comments on the paper.