Emerging Research Trends in Green Finance: A Bibliometric Overview
, Tushar Soubhari 3, Vishnu N S 4, Sthitipragyan Biswal 5 and Shalini Patnaik 6
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In order to evaluate the current condition and advancement of academic research on green finance, the study "Emerging Research Trends in Green Finance: A Bibliometric Overview" uses a core bibliometric technique. Although the paper that the authors provided is intriguing and related to the journal's goals, there are some points that need to be examined again. The issue raised is pertinent to both the journal and the wider field. The topic addressed is relevant for the journal and for the field, as large.
In the introduction the presentation of the structure of the paper is missing.
The methodology sounds solid however it needs to be well conceptualized to answer the diversified research questions. The results go with the flow of the manuscript. Using bibliometric criteria, the authors investigate 1748 journal articles from the SCOPUS database published from 1997 to 2023. VOSviewer software was employed for network investigation. The most prolific authors, highly cited authors and papers, subject area research, citation records, year-by-year document publications, place of origin, and citation records were all examined to answer the research questions. However, which research gap was filled throughout this manuscript? I am wondering about some issues such as:
The call for papers of different journal and its scope might be in the traditional green finance which have led submissions in these fields, do the authors have any data on this?
The results show that because green finance is an interdisciplinary field, its issues have evolved over time. After the allowed time, the authors found that most scholars concentrated on the core areas of green finance. The main areas of attention include green innovation, climate finance, investing in green bonds, and financial development through sustainable finance. All of these are consistent with recent studies as well as practices and trends in business and industry.
The most cited authors have previously published in the traditional green finance therefore, their new publications are somehow aligned to their field of expertise and interest. Is there any specific correlation or metrics? Or wordings? Verbatim? or more number of journals issued in these areas/countries related to these topics?
the authors need to add more explanations/analysis related to the graphs VOSviewer
The conclusions seem to be superficial, there are missing the limits of the research (to the exception of WoS to being used in the future) and there are no recommendations for the researchers and for editors for new topics in green finance to being addressed and studied, as mentioned in the objective of the study.
I have noted some inconsistency in the words used and the form of the paper presented to fit the journal.
Good luck
Author Response
Reviewer's Comment:1
In the introduction, the presentation of the structure of the paper is missing.
Response:
The presentation of the structure of the paper is included in the study.
Reviewer's Comment:2
The methodology sounds solid however it needs to be well conceptualized to answer the diversified research questions. The results go with the flow of the manuscript. Using bibliometric criteria, the authors investigate 1748 journal articles from the SCOPUS database published from 1997 to 2023. VOSviewer software was employed for network investigation. The most prolific authors, highly cited authors and papers, subject area research, citation records, year-by-year document publications, place of origin, and citation records were all examined to answer the research questions.
However, which research gap was filled throughout this manuscript? I am wondering about some issues such as:
The call for papers of different journal and its scope might be in the traditional green finance which have led submissions in these fields, do the authors have any data on this?
Response:
The Abstract of the paper is completely revised and necessary changes are made in the paper.
Reviewer's Comment:3
The most cited authors have previously published in the traditional green finance therefore, their new publications are somehow aligned to their field of expertise and interest. Is there any specific correlation or metrics? Or wordings? Verbatim? or more number of journals issued in these areas/countries related to these topics?
Response:
This aspect is not at all considered in this study.
Reviewer's Comment:4
The authors need to add more explanations/analysis related to the graphs VOSviewer.
Response:
More explanations and analysis for VOSviewer are included in the study.
Reviewer's Comment:5
The conclusions seem to be superficial, there are missing the limits of the research (to the exception of WoS to being used in the future) and there are no recommendations for the researchers and for editors for new topics in green finance to being addressed and studied, as mentioned in the objective of the study.
Response:
The objectives of the study are mentioned in the introduction section. Also, the recommendations and implications of the study are added separately.
Reviewer's Comment:6
I have noted some inconsistency in the words used and the form of the paper presented to fit the journal.
Response:
The citations and words are changed as per the MDPI templates.
Reviewer 2 Report
Aim of the work is to employs a fundamental bibliometric methodology to assess the current state and progress of academic research on green finance.
Some improvements are required:
Abstract: Please apply the structure of the MDPI journals template
Introduction: the Green Finance was not born with the 2030 Agenda, but its origins are to be found in the sustainable and responsible finance created after the 2007 economic crisis. Please for more details see Morano, P., Tajani, F., & Anelli, D. (2020). A decision support model for investment through the social impact bonds. The case of the city of Bari (Italy). Valori e Valutazioni, (24). and provide the related changes about this.
This part should highlights the features and the critical issues on the Green Finance, not provide for a literature background himself.
Methodology
Please declare how the most influencing papers on Green Finance has been selected.
It is possible to hoghlight what are the main topics addressed worldwide and the main methodology used?
Conclusions
Add the main practical implications of this study
Author Response
Reviewer’s Comment:1
Abstract: Please apply the structure of the MDPI journal template
Response:
The MDPI journal template is added in the paper.
Reviewer’s Comment:2
Introduction: The Green Finance was not born with the 2030 Agenda, but its origins are to be found in the sustainable and responsible finance created after the 2007 economic crisis. Please for more details see Morano, P., Tajani, F., & Anelli, D. (2020). A decision support model for investment through the social impact bonds. The case of the city of Bari (Italy). Valori e Valutazioni, (24). and provide the related changes about this.
This part should highlight the features and the critical issues on the Green Finance, not provide for a literature background himself.
Response:
The origin of green finance is included in the introduction section of the Paper. Also, the critical issues related to Green Finance are highlighted in a separate section of the paper.
Reviewer’s Comment:3
Methodology: Please declare how the most influencing papers on Green Finance has been selected.
Response:
A total of 1748 documents are found that were relevant to the study after filtering from the SCOPUS database. All the influencing papers are considered as per the highest citations which were mentioned in the SCOPUS database.
Reviewer’s Comment:4
It is possible to highlight what are the main topics addressed worldwide and the main methodology used.
Response:
The worldwide main topic of green finance is already mentioned in the outcomes of the co-occurrence of all keywords and the co-occurrence of the author’s keywords and the methodology used in the study are added in a separate column of Table 2.
Reviewer’s Comment:5
Add the main practical implications of this study
Response:
A separate section for the implications of this study is added in the Paper.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
for the next version, use track changes enabling us to view faster all the changes and modifications you have done to yoour manuscripts.
some amendments are shown clearly whereas others were hard to find!
as for the questions and comments, you answered some of them briefly without taking into consideration the remaining parts of the questions, justifying your answer or elaborating your reply .
i ask you to review the previous questions to which you didn't answer and give me your scientific reply.
thank you and good luck.
Author Response
Reviewer's Comment:1
In the introduction, the presentation of the structure of the paper is missing.
Response:
The presentation of the structure of the paper is included in the study.
Reviewer's Comment:2
The methodology sounds solid however it needs to be well conceptualized to answer the diversified research questions. The results go with the flow of the manuscript. Using bibliometric criteria, the authors investigate 1748 journal articles from the SCOPUS database published from 1997 to 2023. VOSviewer software was employed for network investigation. The most prolific authors, highly cited authors and papers, subject area research, citation records, year-by-year document publications, place of origin, and citation records were all examined to answer the research questions.
However, which research gap was filled throughout this manuscript? I am wondering about some issues such as:
The call for papers of different journal and its scope might be in the traditional green finance which have led submissions in these fields, do the authors have any data on this?
Response:
First, we have changed the entire Abstract structure as per the MDPI template. As per the Reviewer’s comment, we do not have any data on this prospect because the paper is fully based on bibliometric analysis, and data were extracted from the SCOPUS database only. Thus, the call for papers from different journals was difficult to extract from CSV files from SCOPUS. Though this paper is a review paper, the research gap is highlighted through research questions. Such as:
- What are the current trends in research publications on green finance?
- What publications and papers have the most impact on green finance research?
- Which organizations, nations, and authors most frequently contribute to the field of green finance?
- What are the primary subject areas and keywords for study in green finance?
- What are the recent issues and challenges in green finance?
- What areas of green finance research will be pursued in the future?
Second, the authors found that most scholars concentrated on the core areas of green finance. The main areas of attention include green innovation, climate finance, investing in green bonds, and financial development through sustainable finance. All of these are consistent with recent studies as well as practices and trends in business and industry.
Reviewer's Comment:3
The most cited authors have previously published in traditional green finance therefore, their new publications are somehow aligned with their field of expertise and interest. Is there any specific correlation or metrics? Or wordings? Verbatim? or more journals issued in these areas/countries related to these topics?
Response:
Yes, there are many authors who have worked in this area in a different context. Their wording on this topic is linked with their other research in this area. In this study, we are highlighting a few authors’ examples to address this question.
Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., & Yoshino, N. have studied in green finance and their investment and published in different journals in different years. Taghizadeh-Hesary, F also worked with other researchers regarding green economic growth as mediating role of green finance. Thus, it concluded that green finance is that wording (keyword) that connects the other studies in different ways.
For reference, we have attached these authors’ citations below.
Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., & Yoshino, N. (2019). The way to induce private participation in green finance and investment. Finance Research Letters, 31, 98-103.
Taghizadeh-Hesary, F., & Yoshino, N. (2020). Sustainable solutions for green financing and investment in renewable energy projects. Energies, 13(4), 788.
Zhang, D., Mohsin, M., Rasheed, A. K., Chang, Y., & Taghizadeh-Hesary, F. (2021). Public spending and green economic growth in BRI region: mediating role of green finance. Energy Policy, 153, 112256.
Reviewer's Comment:4
The authors need to add more explanations/analysis related to the graphs VOSviewer.
Response:
More explanations and analyses for VOSviewer are included in the study.
Reviewer's Comment:5
The conclusions seem to be superficial, there are missing the limits of the research (to the exception of WoS being used in the future) and there are no recommendations for the researchers and for editors for new topics in green finance to being addressed and studied, as mentioned in the objective of the study.
Response:
The objectives of the study are mentioned in the introduction section. Also, the recommendations and implications of the study are added separately. New limitations point is also added to the study.
Reviewer's Comment:6
I have noted some inconsistencies in the words used and the form of the paper presented to fit the journal.
Response:
The citations and words are changed as per the MDPI templates.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
dear authors,
thank you for answering my comments, however from the conclusion section and onward the sections consist of almost a single paragrapg: limitation, recommendation, future work...i believe you can arrange it differently.
good luck
Author Response
As per the reviewer's comment, the conclusion section is written in one paragraph, which consists of the limitations, the implications, and the recommendations.
