Review Reports - Beyond the Financial Horizon: A Critical Review of Social Responsibility in Latin American Credit Unions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The methods and key words for the selection of the documents used for research are adequate. The method used allowed the selection of relevant documents for conducting the critical literature literature review. The paper is well structured, findings and conclusions are well documented.

Elements of the originality of the paper reside in introducing analysis of social responsibility of financial cooperatives and their positioning in the financial landscape.

I recommend the paper for publication.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor English editing recommended

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to express our gratitude for your valuable comments and suggestions, which motivated us and significantly helped to improve our manuscript.

Sincerely yours,

The authors.

Specific comments:

C1: The methods and key words for the selection of the documents used for research are adequate. The method used allowed the selection of relevant documents for conducting the critical literature review. The paper is well structured, findings and conclusions are well documented.

Elements of the originality of the paper reside in introducing analysis of social responsibility of financial cooperatives and their positioning in the financial landscape.

I recommend the paper for publication.

R1: We would like to thank to Reviewer for his/her kind words and for appreciating our work. We sincerely appreciate the constructive and positive comments regarding our manuscript. In this context, we have deemed it appropriate to improve the document in several sections. These changes are in red into the text.

Thank you again!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

General comments:

The topic covered by the article could be interesting and may deserve further investigations for a significant contribution in the field of finance and sustainability. However, the paper lacks in many aspects and still appears in an early stage of a fruitful research route.

In fact, the authors do not make it clear why studying the specific case of cooperatives within the financial systems in Latin America is relevant and what the main differences with the other types of intermediaries are which can justify a dedicated research effort. Moreover, the authors do not provide enough motivations on the reason to study this topic with reference to the Latin American case. It seems just that the authors have a particular interest on the topic and pertain to that region of the World, but what is the contribution of this specific case to the current state of the literature?

The authors just state that "In Latin America, cooperatives have contributed to the region's economic and social development”. Actually, cooperativism is present and contributes to the economic progress of other areas of the world, so what's the relevance of studying this aspect in Latin America nowadays?

Moreover, there could be other and more actual research perspectives, which can justify the focus on the financial role of cooperatives in Latin America such as the study of how fintech application in cooperativism is nowadays sustaining the financial development of relatively under-developed regions in the world.

We suggest the authors to consider a complete restructuring and re-writing of the article since in its current state it appears more like a theoretical note than a scientific paper.

In fact, the writing is often didactic and presents some normative prescripts (for example - Page 2: "Financial entities must effectively manage their resources, optimize their investments, and ensure liquidity to face economic challenges. Financial management thus becomes a tool for these entities to achieve stability, transparency, and the capacity to fulfil their role in the economy. In this regard, timely management involves the implementation of solid policies and procedures in areas such as: i) risk management, ii) liquidity, iii) capital, iv) regulatory compliance, and v) integration of innovative technologies") rather then been organized in the common form of a scientific work, as follows: i) outline of the research objectives and reference literature, with the aim to highlight the originality and relevance of the proposed contribution; ii) presentation of the research method; iii) application of the research methods; iv) findings and incremental contribution of the research work; v) conclusions and avenues for future research.

Specific comments

I suggest the authors to revise the title since it is too long and there is a double ":".

The methodology used to conduct the study ("PRISMA" as mentioned in paragraph 2) should be described more in depth in a dedicated paragraph. However, the authors should make a further effort and consider the most effective methods used in literature for conducting bibliometrical studies (such as meta-Analysis) which can produce better and more significant insights through a more structured organization and clusterization of the reference studies.

A valuable reference to better assess a bibliometrical study can be found here: Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 133, 285-296.

The authors should better clarify the data related to the screening process (records screened 305? 406? Not clear)

Figure 2.: too basic, doesn't add to the existing knowledge about financial intermediation, replace with a different figure wich highlights in particular the role of the cooperatives within the financial system and the different characteristics they have with respect to the other non-cooperative financial intermediaries

3.2 too theoretical and basic paragraph

Figure 3-4: too theoretical and basic, not outlying the specific aspects of the research work

I suggest the authors to revise paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 focusing more on the role of the credit unions within the financial system and their differences with respect to other financial intermediaries, then highlight why sustainability entails a particular relevance for these intermediaries and if and how it has an incremental value with respect to the other intermediaries, in short motivate better why the subject is relevant and deserves a dedicated study.

Provide a convincing discussion on why Latin America should be a significant case and should add some incremental knowledge to the topic of financial cooperativism and sustainability. You can refer to some scholarly contributions which focused on Latin America, such as:

Arora, P., & De, P. (2020). Environmental sustainability practices and exports: The interplay of strategy and institutions in Latin America. Journal of World Business, 55(4), 101094.

Teti, E., Dell’Acqua, A., Etro, L., & Resmini, F. (2016). Corporate governance and cost of equity: empirical evidence from Latin American companies. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 16(5), 831-848.

Tabak, B. M., Fazio, D. M., & Cajueiro, D. O. (2013). Systemically important banks and financial stability: The case of Latin America. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(10), 3855-3866.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

After reviewing and reassesing the article I suggest the authors to submit the paper to an extensive proofreading.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions, which have greatly helped us improve our manuscript. We have made every effort to address them. Below, you will find our point-by-point responses to your comments. All changes are highlighted in red throughout the text.

Sincerely yours,

The authors.

General comments

C1: The topic covered by the article could be interesting and may deserve further investigations for a significant contribution in the field of finance and sustainability. However, the paper lacks in many aspects and still appears in an early stage of a fruitful research route.

R1: We would like to express our sincere gratitude for the constructive and positive comments regarding our manuscript. Your feedback has been invaluable in guiding our revisions and is of great importance to our ongoing research. We have carefully considered your suggestions and made the corresponding corrections. We hope that our efforts to improve the paper in the suggested direction will be appreciated.

C2: In fact, the authors do not make it clear why studying the specific case of cooperatives within the financial systems in Latin America is relevant and what the main differences with the other types of intermediaries are which can justify a dedicated research effort. Moreover, the authors do not provide enough motivations on the reason to study this topic with reference to the Latin American case. It seems just that the authors have a particular interest on the topic and pertain to that region of the World, but what is the contribution of this specific case to the current state of the literature?

R2: Thank you for your suggestions and advice. We have enriched the manuscript by including an explanation of the importance of studying the specific case of cooperatives within the financial systems in Latin America, and our particular interest in this area. In this context, we have also added references related to current research perspectives in Latin America. Following your recommendations, we have refined the introduction and reorganized the results and discussion sections accordingly.

C3: We suggest the authors to consider a complete restructuring and re-writing of the article since in its current state it appears more like a theoretical note than a scientific paper.

R3: Thank you for your valuable advice. In fact, our manuscript is a critical review that describes the financial system and entities while providing a comprehensive analysis of how financial cooperatives in this region implement and uphold social responsibility principles, which are crucial for sustainable development. In light of your feedback, we have restructured and rewritten the manuscript. Please refer to the introduction, methodology, results, and discussion sections for specific modifications.

C4: In fact, the writing is often didactic and presents some normative prescripts (for example - Page 2: "Financial entities must effectively manage their resources, optimize their investments, and ensure liquidity to face economic challenges. Financial management thus becomes a tool for these entities to achieve stability, transparency, and the capacity to fulfil their role in the economy. In this regard, timely management involves the implementation of solid policies and procedures in areas such as: i) risk management, ii) liquidity, iii) capital, iv) regulatory compliance, and v) integration of innovative technologies") rather then been organized in the common form of a scientific work, as follows: i) outline of the research objectives and reference literature, with the aim to highlight the originality and relevance of the proposed contribution; ii) presentation of the research method; iii) application of the researchmethods; iv) findings and incremental contribution of the research work; v) conclusions and avenues for future research.

R4: Thank you for your comments. We have made modifications to the introduction and removed the numbering to avoid any confusion regarding the structure of the article. In line with your suggestion, we have followed the structure of a scientific document by clearly stating the research objectives, the problem, and the justification for the proposed topic. This information has been incorporated into the introduction section. The research methods are now described in the last paragraph of the materials and methods section. Additionally, the main findings and contributions of the research are included in the results and discussion sections. Finally, the implications and avenues for future research are outlined in the conclusion. All the mentioned changes are highlighted in red within the text.

Specific comments:

C5: I suggest the authors to revise the title since it is too long and there is a double ":"

R5: Thank you for your comments. We have addressed this issue and made the necessary change to the title

C6: The methodology used to conduct the study ("PRISMA" as mentioned in paragraph 2) should be described more in depth in a dedicated paragraph. However, the authors should make a further effort and consider the most effective methods used in literature for conducting bibliometrical studies (such as meta-Analysis) which can produce better and more significant insights through a more structured organization and clusterization of the reference studies.

R6: Thank you for your suggestion. We have added more details about PRISMA in the last paragraph of the methodology, incorporating the reference to Donthu et al. that you provided.

C7: The authors should better clarify the data related to the screening process (records screened 305? 406? Not clear)

R7: Thank you for your comment. We have addressed this issue and updated the number of references as reflected in Figure 1.

C8: Figure 2.: too basic, doesn't add to the existing knowledge about financial intermediation, replace with a different figure wich highlights in particular the role of the cooperatives within the financial system and the different characteristics they have with respect to the other non-cooperative financial intermediaries

R8: Thank you for your comments. We have revised Figure 2 to include the role of cooperatives in financial intermediation and provided a description of their functions. Additionally, we have added an explanation regarding financial intermediaries immediately following Figure 2.

C9: 3.2 too theoretical and basic paragraph

R9: Thank you for your comments. The section corresponding to 3.2 has been updated.

C10: Figure 3-4: too theoretical and basic, not outlying the specific aspects of the research work

R10: Thank you for your comments. We have retained Figures 3 and 4; however, we have added a paragraph at the end to further explain the section on financial management and social responsibility.

C11: I suggest the authors to revise paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 focusing more on the role of the credit unions within the financial system and their differences with respect to other financial intermediaries, then highlight why sustainability entails a particular relevance for these intermediaries and if and how it has an incremental value with respect to the other intermediaries, in short motivate better why the subject is relevant and deserves a dedicated study.

R11: Thank you for your advice. We have updated sections 3.2 and 3.3 accordingly.

C12: Provide a convincing discussion on why Latin America should be a significant case and should add some incremental knowledge to the topic of financial cooperativism and sustainability. You can refer to some scholarly contributions which focused on Latin America, such as:

Arora, P., & De, P. (2020). Environmental sustainability practices and exports: The interplay of strategy and institutions in Latin America. Journal of World Business, 55(4), 101094.

Tabak, B. M., Fazio, D. M., & Cajueiro, D. O. (2013). Systemically important banks and financial stability: The case of Latin America. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(10), 3855-3866.

R12: Thank you for your comments and suggestions. We have incorporated the academic contributions you provided, which have enriched the discussion focused on Latin America. Please refer to the discussion section for specific modifications, and review all citations and references for explicit changes.

Thank you again!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review Comments:

1. Background and Importance

The article provides a critical literature review of social responsibility in financial cooperatives, focusing on the Latin American context. It highlights the role of financial cooperatives in promoting economic development, social equity, and sustainability.

2. Methodology

The study employs the PRISMA methodology for the literature review and collects data from multiple databases. This thorough and systematic approach ensures the comprehensiveness and representativeness of the review.

3. Results and Discussion

The paper discusses the components of the financial system and their roles in the global economy, with a focus on the social responsibility of financial cooperatives. These analyses provide a solid theoretical foundation for future research.

4. Minor Revision Suggestions

Comprehensiveness of the Literature Review: Although the article conducts a thorough literature search across multiple databases, some key references are missing. Including studies on social responsibility of financial cooperatives in other regions (e.g., Europe, North America) could enhance the article's generalizability and comparative analysis.
Empirical Analysis: The paper is primarily a literature review and lacks empirical data support. Incorporating empirical studies or case analyses would provide concrete examples of the social responsibility performance and impact of financial cooperatives.
Structure and Logic: Some paragraphs could be better structured for clarity. For instance, the transition between the methodology and results sections could be more seamless to ensure readers clearly understand the logical flow of the research.
Language and Expression: The language is generally clear, but some parts could be more concise. The abstract, for example, could more directly summarize the key findings and conclusions of the article.
References: Ensure uniform formatting of all cited references and clearly annotate all data sources.

5. Summary

Overall, this is a valuable academic article that systematically reviews the social responsibility of financial cooperatives in Latin America. However, there is room for improvement in terms of the comprehensiveness of the literature review, empirical support, structural coherence, and language clarity. I hope the authors consider these suggestions to enhance the quality and impact of the article.

Rating: 7/10

I look forward to seeing the revised version.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for your valuable comments and suggestions, which have greatly helped us improve our manuscript. We have made every effort to address them where possible. Below, you will find our point-by-point responses to your comments. Please note that the changes made in the text were intended to address all the reviewers' feedback, and therefore, the revised text is highlighted in red. Thank you again!

Sincerely yours,

The authors.

C1: Review Comments

Background and Importance

Methodology

Results and Discussion

R1: Thank you for your constructive and positive feedback on our manuscript. Your comments have been invaluable in revising our paper and guiding our research. We have carefully addressed your suggestions and made the necessary corrections, and we hope these improvements meet your expectations.

Minor Revision Suggestions

C2: Comprehensiveness of the Literature Review: Although the article conducts a thorough literature search across multiple databases, some key references are missing. Including studies on social responsibility of financial cooperatives in other regions (e.g., Europe, North America) could enhance the article's generalizability and comparative analysis.

R2: Thank you for your comments. To enhance the search for specialized literature, we have included examples from other regions of the world. Please refer to the introduction for specific changes.

C3: Empirical Analysis: The paper is primarily a literature review and lacks empirical data support. Incorporating empirical studies or case analyses would provide concrete examples of the social responsibility performance and impact of financial cooperatives.

R3: Thank you for your comments. We have added relevant references to the introduction based on your suggestions and further clarified the topic of the paper.

C4: Structure and Logic: Some paragraphs could be better structured for clarity. For instance, the transition between the methodology and results sections could be more seamless to ensure readers clearly understand the logical flow of the research.

R4: Thank you for your advice. To enhance clarity, we have updated the transition text between the methodology and results sections.

C5: Language and Expression: The language is generally clear, but some parts could be more concise. The abstract, for example, could more directly summarize the key findings and conclusions of the article.

R5: Thank you for your advice. We have modified the abstract to summarize the main findings and conclusions.

C6: References: Ensure uniform formatting of all cited references and clearly annotate all data sources.

R6: Thank you for your comments. We have adhered to the author guidelines and thoroughly revised the formatting of all citations and references. Please refer to the citations and references section for specific changes.

C7: 5. Summary

Rating: 7/10

I look forward to seeing the revised version.

R7: We would like to thank the Reviewer for their comments and suggestions. All changes have been highlighted in red throughout the text.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors incorporated in the new version of the paper all the suggestions made by this reviewer in the first round of review., thus the article has been substantially improved. However, I suggest the authors to make an English proofreading of the article to improve its readability.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely thank you for your kind words and for recognizing the value of our work. We greatly appreciate your constructive and positive feedback on our manuscript. In response, we have made improvements to several sections of the document, focusing on refining the English language to enhance clarity and precision for our readers.

Sincerely,

The Authors