Green Economy as a Driver of Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for MSEs
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAlthough the authors specify the local scope of the research, I believe it is necessary to reference results from similar studies conducted in other regions. It is recommended to include additional empirical evidence and cite more recent studies that specifically highlight the Green Economy as a driver of corporate social responsibility. Doing so will not only reinforce the study’s relevance to its local setting but also provide a stronger theoretical and contextual foundation for the proposed hypotheses.
The introduction should be enhance to concentrate on the research contribution.
As long as a comprehensive measurement scale should be provided in Appendix (A),
Including literature specific to the region will strengthen the research framework's validity and credibility.
When you say
- Methodology 297
Due to the study's characteristics, it is framed as descriptive and quantitative research 298
to understand the relationship between green economy and CSR in MSEs. The quantita- 299
tive approach was used to view the associated opportunities and challenges comprehen- 300
sively. The target population includes MSEs involved in economic activities related to the 301
green economy. Companies from various sectors will be selected based on their participa- 302
tion in sustainable practices. The sample was selected through intentional non-probabil- 303
istic sampling, prioritizing the representation of different sectors and dimensions of MSEs. 304
Inclusion criteria were established based on adopting green economy and CSR practices. 305
Those MSEs that did not meet the inclusion criteria and those unwilling to participate in 306
the study were excluded from the sample.
- Missed the response rate of the questionnaire,
-Missed Exclusion of invalid questionnaires.
- Missed method of collecting data
The authors need to explain why WarpPLS 7.0 was not specifically chosen to analyze the measurement and structural model, or using other software like SmartPLS.
I didn’t find any discussion for the results and findings
The conclusion section is not clear and the practical, theoretical implications must be added to offer more specific, actionable recommendations.
When including references, it's best practice to provide the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to ensure easy access and verification.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, the journal format and bibliography have already been completed.
I hereby inform you that the observations made to the article entitled: Green Economy as a Driver of Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for SMEs have been corrected in the following order:
- References to results similar to the study are developed in section 2, sections 72–95.
- Evidence from studies highlighting the green economy and CSR are developed in sections 142–157 and 72–95.
- Improvements to the introduction are developed in sections 52–60.
- Appendix A and the measurement scale are shown in sections 794–797.
A server:
Dr. Jesus Fernando Bejarano Auqui
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsStrengths
- The paper effectively establishes the correlation between green economy practices and CSR implementation in MSEs, providing valuable statistical evidence (R=0.91).
- Your methodology combining quantitative analysis with principal component analysis is thorough and supports your conclusions well.
- The "Diamond Theory of Green Economy in CSR" framework offers a useful conceptual model for businesses seeking to integrate sustainability into their strategies.
- The statistical analysis is rigorous, with appropriate tests for normality, correlations, and confirmatory factor analysis that strengthen your findings.
Suggestions for Improvement
- Literature Integration: While your literature review is comprehensive, it could benefit from incorporating more recent empirical studies on how extreme weather events and climate change are reshaping corporate strategies related to green economy and CSR. Some relevant research examining how firms adapt to environmental challenges through investment strategies could strengthen your theoretical foundation.
- Conceptual Framework Expansion: The "Diamond Theory" could be enhanced by exploring how venture capital networks influence corporate green technology innovation adoption among MSEs. Recent studies indicate that venture capital plays a critical role in facilitating the transition to sustainable technologies.
- Practical Implications: The paper would benefit from more detailed recommendations for MSE owners on implementing the findings, particularly regarding how digital investments could improve environmental performance in resource-constrained contexts.
- Methodological Clarity: Consider providing more details about the sampling method and potential limitations in the research design.
Your manuscript would be significantly strengthened by incorporating more recent literature on green economy and corporate social responsibility.
Minor Comments
- Consider refining Figure 3 for better clarity in displaying cluster relationships
- Some citations in the text need formatting corrections (e.g., line 189-190)
- A few typographical errors need correction (e.g., lines 367, 435)
Conclusion
Overall, this manuscript makes a valuable contribution to understanding how the green economy serves as a driver for CSR in MSEs. With the suggested revisions and incorporation of additional relevant literature, particularly regarding climate impacts, digital transformation, and financing mechanisms, this paper has the potential to significantly enhance the discourse on sustainable business practices for smaller enterprises.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, the journal format and bibliography have already been completed.
Dear Sir/Madam:
I hereby inform you that the observations made to the article entitled: Green Economy as a Driver of Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for SMEs have been corrected in the following order
- Methodological phenomena and climate change are transforming corporate strategies related to the green economy are developed in sections 309–323.
- Venture capital is evidenced in sections 345–357.
- Further details on the sampling method and potential limitations in the research design are detailed in sections 416–431.
- Refinements to Figure 3 are evident in sections 574–575.
5 and 6. Citations need formatting corrections and typos corrected in the manuscript.
A server:
Dr. Jesus Fernando Bejarano Auqui
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article has been made in a good way. The topics are presented straight and of great importance. The authors study the link between the green economy and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSEs). The topic is current and matches up with present research trends.
This paper has many strengths. The objectives of the study are clearly stated. The methodology is also very solid. The authors made use of surveys with a reliable design. The Cronbach's alpha values are high: 0.89 and 0.91. The sample size is large, being 350 participants. The statistical methods appear appropriate: normality tests, correlation analyses, principal component analyses, cluster analyses, and confirmatory factor analyses. Results are convincing: there is a strong correlation between green economy practices and CSR, with R = 0.91. The fit indices for the model are excellent: CFI = 0.988, RMSEA = 0.093. The article presents an innovative concept: the Green Economy Diamond, integrating innovation, regulation, consumer awareness, and financing.
The authors do not discuss their study's limitations, constituting minor weaknesses. References to sampling problems or geographic scope would be good. The study focuses on one country (most likely Peru) but this is never discussed. There is no description of the industries of the MSEs in detail. The barriers to CSR adoption could draw more attention, particularly microeconomic barriers like cost and lack of technological know-how.
The language and structure of the article are clear. The articles show coherence and smooth flow. The references put forth are varied, numerous, and well-chosen. The writing style fits the academic genre, but some sections could benefit from being shorter for clarity and flow.
The article is, in conclusion, making a truly important contribution. The methodology is strong, and the contribution is relevant to current challenges in sustainable business. I recommend the paper for publication with small adjustments, adding a discussion on the study's limitations and polishing some descriptions.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, the journal format and bibliography have already been completed.
Dear Sir/Madam:
I hereby inform you that the observations made to the article entitled: Green Economy as a Driver of Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for SMEs have been corrected in the following order
- The authors do not discuss the limitations of the study. The answer is discussed in sections 460–491.
A server:
Dr. Jesus Fernando Bejarano Auqui
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsOverall, this is a good paper which deserves to be published. There is a very clear purpose and focus of the paper, some very interesting results are presented and with potentially valuable conclusions. However, some important issues need to be addressed before publication, as outlined in the following.
1) The abstract would be more interesting and impactful if there were fewer statistical results (just provide the most important as overarching statements) and a little more on the implications of your research for the green economy, for CSR and for MSEs.
2) There is something awkward about the sentence in lines 40-44. After the reference (Fairlie, 2017), the text doesn’t seem to flow naturally from the first part of the sentence, and the whole sentence ends with a closing bracket ), but there is no opening bracket (. Maybe some text is missing?
3) There is also something wrong with the last three words in line 50 – especially for non-Spanish speakers..:-)
4) The word “discovery” in line 71 should perhaps instead be replaced by the word “published” or similar?
5) The introduction is excellent, especially the literature reviews. The only small thing I miss is some brief mention of the important criticisms especially over the past 10-15 years of the concepts of the ‘green economy’ and of ‘CSR’. (Such criticisms are easily found on the web. For example, both have – sometimes legitimately – been accused of “green-washing”.) This need not involve changes to other parts of the paper but would signal that you are aware of the possible shortcomings of these concepts which remain, of course, mainstream so that your paper is relevant.
6) Line 213: What are the “sessions” mentioned here?
7) Section 1.8: It is not clear what type of ‘diamond’ theory is being used in this section? There are many variations but there is no reference. Is this the Michael Porter theory? There are no references in this section to justify the use specifically of the four aspects selected. It would be useful to briefly explain the ‘diamond’ in the approach you are using – the four aspects of which are otherwise very valid – to justify its use. Is it simply the fact that there are four aspects which can be drawn in the shape of a diamond? In using the word “includes” in lines 225-226, you imply there are more than four which would not constitute a diamond? If so, the use of this word is not very useful. It is not referred to as such in the results nor the conclusions, so it is not clear how a diamond theory/model is useful in the paper?
8) Lines 270-274: This is a very long sentence that is difficult to follow and starts with what seems like a textual error?
9) In section 1.10, only the ‘social’ paragraph provides references. It would be useful to justify the statements made in both the ‘economic’ and the ‘environment’ paragraphs by at least one reference each.
10) Section 2: a) what is the geographic scope of the survey (Peru, global, ??); b) line 311, in which year was the survey carried out?; c) it might be useful to briefly summarise the types of questions asked (are these reflected in the paper’s introduction?); d) the questionnaire and data collected need to be made available to the reader. The URL provided in lines 473-474 does not work; e) what structures were used in the “structured survey” (line 309) – are these as described in lines 298-307?; f) what were the “doubts” mentioned in line 316 and how were these addressed?; g) what were the search terms used for finding relevant articles in scientific databases such as Scopus, and it is unclear how the four quartiles were structured and used?; h) overall, a little more and somewhat more specific information is needed in the methodology section. Section 2.2. is very useful.
11) It would be useful at the beginning of section 3, immediately before section 3.1, to briefly introduce which analyses are being performed, and to provide a justification as to why they were selected and for what purpose. Such an overview will help the reader better understand the results presented and appreciate the flow of argument.
12) Section 3.2: results are impressive, making it even more important that more clarity is given in section 2 as recommended in comment 10 above, and a good introduction to section 3 is provided (as recommended in comment 11).
13) The text accompanying Figure 3 should apply a descriptor to each of the three clusters, i.e. what are the similar characteristics of the MSE owners in each cluster which makes this analysis insightful?
14) Section 4: a very good summarising conclusion, but two things are missing. First in relation in comment 15, it is essential to better understand the sampling process and why each of the methods employed in section 3 were used (see above comments). This might add some caution, or at least a brief discussion of potential weaknesses in the results and thus the conclusions. For example, it would be important to briefly explore the issue of whether or not correlation can be taken as causation in this case. This is already partially done by describing the findings as underlining the “connection” between the variables in line 364. Additionally, this could be done in section 4 with a discussion of a possible weakness in the method given that the sample is drawn only from MSEs practising CSR and green economy and which agree to be interviewed perhaps because this has been successful, whilst MSEs where this was not successful may have declined to be interviewed. In other words, there is a danger that you only capture MSEs where this is successful which might not be adequately representative of all MSEs practising CSR and green economy. Second, it would be very useful, in light of any such weaknesses as well as to further understand the issues raised in the paper, to consider which further research is proposed or recommended for others to undertake.
Author Response
Dear reviewer, the journal format and bibliography have already been completed.
Dear Sir/Madam:
I hereby inform you that the observations made to the article entitled: Green Economy as a Driver of Corporate Social Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for SMEs have been corrected in the following order
1.Summary: Fewer statistical results and more general statements are evident in numerals 10 – 27.
- An odd sentence after the Fairlig reference, 2017, was corrected for consistency from sections 42–51.
- There is something incorrect with the last three words of line 50. Their content was verified in sections 48–51.
- Replace the word "discovery" with "published." The word "discovery" was not found from sections 48–157, so no words were replaced.
- Diamond theory. Porter's theory was not used; rather, it is a theory created by researchers, as evidenced in sections 282–307, 52–60, and 645–653.
- Session 3.2.1. It has references ranging from sections 396 - 414.
7a. The geographic scope of the survey is shown in sections 10- 12.
7b. The year the survey was conducted is shown in sections 422 - 424.
7c. The questionnaire and data are available in sections 806- 808.
7d. The structures used in the survey are shown in sections 435- 439.
7e. Search terms used to find articles, such as Scopus, are shown in sections 441–447.
- In session 3, just before session 3.1, a brief introduction is presented to the purpose of session 3, justifying its selection and purpose, as shown in sections 97–108.
- Figure 3 describes each of the three clusters, as shown in sections 564–580.
10a. A brief explanation of whether correlation can be interpreted as causality is shown in sections 624–630.
10b. Research proposed or recommended for other researchers to investigate is found in sections 662–666.
A server:
Dr. Jesus Fernando Bejarano Auqui
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI think the authors made many adjustments that improved the quality of the paper
