Review Reports - Does Weather-Related Disaster Affect the Financing Costs of Enterprises? Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies in the Mining Industry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper examined how weather-related catastrophes affect the price of equity financing. The researchers discover that climatic disasters considerably raise the cost of equity financing based on sample data of mining businesses listed in China's A-shares market from 2004 to 2019. The paper's goal is appropriately served, and the content is original and relevant to the field. Researchers use appropriate methods to fulfill the aim of the paper, which is properly annotated. The only thing that should be revised and improved is the conclusion of the post, which, in my opinion, is very short.

Author Response

thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Table 4 clearly shows that the main regression model misses important controls. As such, please use the two-way fixed effects model to replicate all the main exercises.

2. In the instrumental variables analysis, the authors need to show the first-stage regression results. In addition, it is very rare to observe IV regression coefficients to be smaller than OLS estimates. The authors need to explain why this can happen.

3. The authors need to provide the correlation matrix.

4. The authors may want to show how long a disaster can affect corporate cost of equity.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

After reading your paper, i have the following remarks that i hope will enhance the quality of the paper:

- First, in the introduction, the authors use the term "literatures" which is nor correct. please correct it as literature. also in line 74. the authors wrote "To the best of our knowledge, there are two literatures on the effect of climate risk on the equity financing cost". it should be corrected as two studies....

- besides, the authors need to justify the china context ( why did they choose to study chinese listed firms? ) .finally , the authors need to put the article design at the end of the introduction section.

- when describing the control variables, the authors need to select some previous literature to justify their choice. i can suggest the following recent literature: Ghardallou,W. 2023. The Heterogeneous Effect of Leverage on Firm Performance: A Quantile Regression Analysis. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, forthcoming.

W.Ghardallou (2022). Capital structure decisions and corporate performance: Does Firm’s profitability matter? Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research, 81 (8), pp. 859-865.

- in the baseline model, the authors need to clarify the estimation method ( static panel, dynamic panel...)

- in table 2, what is the meaning of (10-5, 10-4....) it should be explained in note below the table. also variables and specifications should be explained in the note. this remark applies for all the tables.

- the conclusion is too short. the authors need to expand their results in terms of policy implications and recommendations. also the authors should underline the limits and future direction of the study.

Good luck in your revision!

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you for a very interesting article. Please find some minor remarks below:

1. ‘Cash holdings’ and ‘managerial ability’ are not sufficiently described, in particular, it is unclear how to assess ‘managerial ability’. It would be interesting to describe these mitigation ways in more detail based on the cited literature. Furthermore, the relationship between ‘managerial ability’ and ‘earnings management’ (chapter 2) or the lack of such a relationship, is not addressed.

2. It is worth considering including the discussion as a separate chapter.

3. Compared to the main part of the article, the conclusions are too condensed and should be expanded.\