Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I read the paper "Corporate Social Responsibilities of Food Processing
Companies in Vietnam from Consumer Perspective". It seems interesting and well structured, but some changes are required.

a. to define better the aim of the paper and to restructure the abstract,

b. to add some papers both in introduction and literature review sections (see below),

c. to explain better methods and results. In particular define the methodological process in depth, and underlines the most important results (e.g. develop some research questions and in the result section answer to all questions,

d. define the main limitations and the future directions of this study.

 

REFERENCES

- Expropriation by the controlling shareholders on firm value in the context of Indonesia: Corporate governance as moderating variable Widyaningsih, I.U., Gunardi, A., Rossi, M., Rahmawati, R. 2017 International Journal of Managerial and Financial Accounting, 9(4), pp. 322-337 

- The impact of corporate characteristics on the financial decisions of companies: evidence on funding decisions by Italian SMEs
Rossi, M., Lombardi, R., Siggia, D., Oliva, N. 2015 Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5(1),2

- Corporate governance and financial performance of italian listed firms. The results of an empirical research Rossi, M., Nerino, M., Capasso, A. 2015 Corporate Ownership and Control, 12(2 CONT5), pp. 628-643

- Disclosure of corporate social responsibility: a comparison between traditional and digital reporting. An empirical analysis on Italian listed companies, Daniela Coluccia; Stefano Fontana; Silvia Solimene, International Journal of Managerial and Financial Accounting, 2016 Vol.8 No.3/4, pp.230 - 246, 10.1504/IJMFA.2016.081854

The impact of social responsibility disclosure on the liquidity of the Jordanian industrial corporations, Alaa Abu Mallouh; Asem Tahtamouni, International Journal of Managerial and Financial Accounting, 2018 Vol.10 No.3, pp.273 - 300, 10.1504/IJMFA.2018.093504

Author Response

Thank you so much for your valuable comments. I have read your comments carefully and tried to revise the paper following your suggestions. I attach my response to your requirements in the file below.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is interesting and innovative but it needs several improvement

 

1) the SDGs is a new field of studies but there are some wide adopted literature sources used to conceptualize the role of the private sector. You must introduce them in your paper.

Scheyvens, R., Banks, G., & Hughes, E. (2016). The private sector and the SDGs: The need to move beyond ‘business as usual’. Sustainable Development, 24(6), 371-382.

Rosati, F., & Faria, L. G. D. (2019). Business contribution to the Sustainable Development Agenda: Organizational factors related to early adoption of SDG reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(3), 588-597.

Rosati, F., & Faria, L. G. (2019). Addressing the SDGs in sustainability reports: The relationship with institutional factors. Journal of cleaner production, 215, 1312-1326.

GBS (2019) THE SDGS IN THE REPORTS OF THE ITALIAN COMPANIES. RESEARCH DOCUMENT N. 16 available at: http://ojs.francoangeli.it/_omp/index.php/oa/catalog/book/436

 

2. The theoretical background is not clear. What is the theory behind your research?

3. The results could be reinforced through more informaiton about your personal believes

 

Good work, after the resubmission I will re-evaluate your paper

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments. We tried to revise the paper following your suggestions.

I would like to attach my response to your comments below.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of this paper is of interest for the readers of Sustainability.

However, the authors have rushed it. They must follow the instructions for authors document, as it makes the review process easier and faster.

 

The following comment would help to improve the paper:

 

-Line 31: Rephrase "[2] asserts"28.1

- Each statement must be backed up by references

-Check line 66: recently 323 million Fortune 500 companies

- Line 70: framework¹. reference format not valid

- Lines 93, 96 and 99: references formats are not valid

- Line 117: fatalities2. reference format not valid

- Introduction is too long. Some parts of it should be included in the literature review.

 -There are many data without proper references.

 -Line 140, 148, 149.... : References with wrong format

 -Literature review should have a clearer structure

 -Line 314: Figure 1

- Figure 2 has red underlining

- Line 379: [20],[20]

- Table 2: Male 28.1% + Female 61.9% = 90%

- If 76% of respondents have a university degree, the then title "Vietnam from Consumer Perspective" is misleading

 -Monthly income should be indicated in dollars to be easier to understand by most of the readers.

- This result should be better researched: "This means the higher consumers’ perception of environmental responsibility, the less favourable attitude they give to the company", as it is not related with the following phrase in the conclusion: "implementing good CSR practices is crucial to the management and operation of businesses. CSR also provides a strategic tool for enterprises to build brand reputation and customer loyalty and to effectively deal with risks and crisis"

 

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments. We tried to revise the paper following your suggestions.

I would like to attach my response to your comments below.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I don't see the refernces suggested.

Please realize all changes required

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments. We have revised the paper in accordance with your suggestions.

Please see the attachment for our response.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Well done. In My opinion, The paper could Be published 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments.

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have significantly improved the paper, and properly replied to all my comments. My recommendation is Accept in present form.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments.