Corporate Social Irresponsibility Punishments from Stakeholders—Evidence from China
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I encourage you to look into the recent papers that examine the effect of not performing well socially and economically. There is much debate now on the theory of dual responsibility and recent papers examine under which conditions can realize better / worse financial returns from their CSR investments. You need to incorporate this line from recent literature to increase the visibility, relevance, and engagement of your work.
Author Response
Thank you for valuable advice. We have made some additions in the manuscript. And yes, inconsistent conclusions encourage researchers begin to consider CSIR and financial results under different conditions, like the development level of marketization, media coverage, information technology and others, however, few studies have examined the underlying process mechanism leading to the final outcomes from transaction costs, especially based on the perspective of various stakeholder groups. In other words, the difference between varation transaction costs and accordingly profits from CSIR could explain the conflicting results of previous research on financial performance.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is interesting, it deals with an important and quite novel topic of Corporate Social Irresponsibility Punishments (in China) and it is my pleasure to review it.
The paper has merits, is very detailed, organized, and uses a solid scientific and logical tool. Methodology and approaches are interesting, systematic and comprehensive.
However, I would have some considerations and suggestions for improving the quality of the article.
- The hypotheses are clear, appropriate to the context, but somewhat as expected. It is presumed that, being an “irresponsible” behavior (so with negative, unfavourable significance) and not a “responsible” one, there will be costs (in human resources, suppliers, lenders etc.), but rewards.
- Unclear "Hypothesis 2. Crisis management capacity decreases the negative effect of CSIR on transaction costs", does not seem consistent with the preceding text.
- Also, in Ch. 3.2.3. Moderating variables - it is not clear how the Crisis management capacity variable was measured.
- Similarly, it is debatable to define the political connection variable as the presence of a person from the company … in the National People's Congress ... at all levels or a member of the CPPCC .... etc.
We accept the particular character of the relationship between the political power / party and the decision-centres in the economy, but, at least in this case, it is too rudimentary interpreted: what does the presence of these people in companies mean, how does their influence materialize? Surely, the influence exists, but how was it measured and interpreted? Otherwise there are assumptions, ideologically influenced in both directions. The approach is interesting, but insufficiently scientifically substantiated.
- In Discussion - rows 332-334 the statement: ”However, a large number of CSIR behaviors still exist in Chinese business, which may indicate that the punishment of “doing bad” is not too serious to preventing enterprises due to uneven regional development in China” is questionable. The repetition and / or appearance of new companies or managers with reprehensible, irresponsible behaviors is not necessarily dependent on the frequency and severity of punishments, regional determined. A broader discussion on this topic would be advisable.
Minor formal issues
- Abbreviations have to be explained at their first occurrence in the text See CPPCC
- references [ ] connected/welded to the previous word (see practice[4–8], company[9])
- similar, connected letters and numbers, etc.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this article and good luck!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank the authors for this interesting topic. I think CSR in this conception is a very hot topic. I have some recommendations:
- I miss the definiont of CSR in the text, specify the termin e.g. from this text: Činčalová, S.; Hedija, V. Firm Characteristics and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Case of Czech Transportation and Storage Industry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1992. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051992
- in Abstract and also in the text I miss the main goal/aim
- in Abstract I miss the size of sample
- Is this sample representative?
- in Discussion I miss the comparison to another studies
- Do you think your Methodology could be used in another country as well? Why yes/not?
Good luck in future, this is very inspiring paper!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
In this new version of the article, the authors properly addressed my previous comments and suggestions.
