Review Reports

1. Summary

We sincerely appreciate the reviewer's meaningful comments on this paper. We have revised the paper to make it more complete, reflecting the reviewer's comments.

We have made every effort to faithfully reflect the reviewer's comments. Please refer to the responses to the comments below and the revised manuscript uploaded for details on the revisions and additions.

 2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Comments 1:

Abstract.

The Abstract should provide an overview of the work. Please follow the ADMSCI guidelines and use the following structure: background and purpose of the article; methods (briefly describe the methodology); main findings; main conclusions or interpretations.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

Therefore, have revised the entire abstract on page 1 in accordance with the ADMSCI guidelines as follows.

“In this study, we aimed to analyze whether ESG strategies can be utilized as sustainable strategies with practical necessity and effectiveness in solving problems within a realistic business environment. To this end, through an in-depth case analysis of Hansol Paper, South Korea's leading paper company and a global paper manufacturer, we explored the conditions and processes under which ESG strategies can be implemented as practical problem-solving and sustainable strategies within the business environment. Hansol Paper addressed specific business crises such as supply chain instability, rising energy costs, and declining paper demand by integrating ESG strategies, through which the company achieved results in problem-solving and innovation within the business value chain, building trust with external stakeholders and achieving high ESG performance. The foundation for the integration of ESG and business strategies and their sustained implementation was established through enhanced professionalism and transparency within the company's governance structure, including an increase in the number of external directors and female executives. This study presents the processes and conditions under which ESG strategies are designed and implemented with the purpose of actively addressing business challenges, using Hansol Paper as an in-depth case study. Our findings are expected to contribute to the academic and practical development of strategies that can enable companies to adapt to changes in industrial structures and business environments.”

Comments 2:

Introduction.

The knowledge gap is not clearly defined. Lack of investment in ESG, scepticism, or ESG fatigue are widely discussed topics. The authors should explain why this study matters; what issues and gaps exist in current research.

 The contribution of this study remains vaguely explained. What novel contributions are presented that were not discussed in previous studies?

Response 2:

We appreciate your comments and have clarified and revised the introduction accordingly.

This paper aims to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of business-based ESG management as a strategic tool for solving specific business problems or achieving performance improvements as discussed in previous empirical studies.

To this end, we conducted an in-depth case analysis of Hansol Paper, a leading company in the pulp and paper industry with significant environmental impact, to identify the linkage processes and conditions between the company's business issues, ESG plans, and implementation, and to propose academic and strategic development directions for future ESG research.

This content is explained in more detail in the first and second paragraphs of page 2 of I. Introduction.

Comments 3:

Literature review.

The presented literature review is not enough to underpin the field of study, conceptualize a theoretical framework, and proceed to further investigation. What was derived from this review as an output or an input for a case study?

The concept of ESG strategy should be clarified. It appears that authors equate the CSR, sustainability strategy, and other similar activities to one ESG strategy.

It is essential to include studies from 2022 and 2025, since authors argue in the introduction that “since 2022, changes in the external environment…”.

Response 3:

We appreciate your accurate and important comments and have accepted all of your suggestions and made the following revisions.

1. We have revised almost all of the structure and content of the existing literature review and organized it around recent studies on ESG that are the focus of this paper.

2. In “Integrating ESG and business strategy,” we reviewed the latest research on business-based ESG strategies and clarified how this study aims to build on these studies.

3. In the section on “Changes in ESG strategy in compliance with IFRS S1·S2,” we have added a literature review to explain how the findings of this study can contribute to the requirements of IFRS S1, as suggested by reviewer 3.

4. Governance and ESG Performance is also an important factor in this study as a condition for the continuous implementation of business-based ESG, and it is a key factor analyzed in the case study. Therefore, we have supplemented it with recent studies that form the basis for this.

5. All sections have been supplemented with existing papers from 2022 to 2025 and reviewed with a focus on these.

Please refer to the entire literature review on pages 2-4 for the details of the revisions.

Comments 4:

Methodology.

Authors should follow the traditional approach in describing the case study, which should include: the case context and background information within its real-world context, the data collection methods (e.g., interviews, observations, documents), the analytical framework or methods used (data collection and data analysis), ethical consideration, and any steps taken to ensure validity and reliability.

The core research question that authors are trying to answer needs to be presented, which would ground the selection of methods, selection of the case and etc.

Response 4:

This paper emphasizes that the case study method is an important analytical method that is essential and appropriate for deriving the desired content according to the research objectives, and that the procedure was followed faithfully. However, it seems that this was not accurately conveyed in the main text.

Therefore, in the first part of 3. Research Design (3.1. Subject of Analysis: Hansol Paper), the representativeness and validity of Hansol Paper as a case study subject were explained.

In the second part, Section 3.2. Analytical Methods, the purpose and necessity of applying the case study method, an explanation of the analytical data, strategies for selecting data to maintain objectivity, and the analytical process are described.

Please refer to the entire content of Section 3. Research Design on pages 4–5 of the main text for further details.

The key questions of this paper are as follows, as presented in the introduction.

1. We aim to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of business-based ESG management discussed in existing studies as a strategic means of solving specific business problems or achieving specific business outcomes.

2. We aim to identify the processes and conditions for linking specific business problems with ESG plans and implementation, and to propose academic and strategic directions for future ESG research.

Comments 5:

Results.

The mix of methodological approaches and previous studies complicates the evaluation of the results section. Please explain all the methodological approaches in methods section, all relevant previous studies in theoretical background section. Authors should clarify the framework for presenting the results.

Response 5:

Based on the reviewer's comments, I have revised the table of contents of this paper as follows to clearly classify and organize the content.

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

3. Research Design

4. Analysis of ESG Strategies for Resolving Business Issues at Hansol Paper

5. Conclusions

In this structure, all previous studies have been included in 2. Literature Review, and the methodological approach has been incorporated into 3. Research Design.

For the process and framework used in the case analysis, please refer to Figure 2 on page 7.

Comments 6:

Discussion.

Although Section 6 is called “Discussion and Conclusion”, authors did not discuss the findings in the context of similar studies. The Discussion section mainly repeats the information that was presented before.

Response 6:

We have completely revised and rewritten the contents pointed out in the Conclusion section of Chapter 5.

In 5.1. Findings, we summarized the results and significance of the study, and in 5.2. Implications, we discussed the development and contributions of this study in the context of existing studies.

4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language

Point 1:

Extensive editing of the English language and style is needed. The current writing lacks clarity and fluidity at both the sentence and paragraph level, which affects the readability and overall presentation.

Response 1:

A significant portion of the entire text has been rewritten, and the quality has been improved through MDPI's professional editing service.

1. Summary

We sincerely appreciate the reviewer's meaningful comments on this paper. We have revised the paper to make it more complete, reflecting the reviewer's comments.

We have made every effort to faithfully reflect the reviewer's comments. Please refer to the responses to the comments below and the revised manuscript uploaded for details on the revisions and additions.

 2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Comments 1:

In the introduction, to  include a brief paragraph related to the methodology of the study

Response 1:

Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment.

We have included the methodology you suggested in the Introduction. Please refer to the following sentence in the second paragraph on page 2.

“In this study, we aim to analyze whether ESG strategies can be utilized as sustainable strategies with practical necessity and effectiveness in solving problems within real business environments. To this end, we conducted an in-depth case study of Korean companies with representative and verifiable ESG implementation. A comprehensive case analysis of Hansol Paper (Hansol, 2025a), South Korea's leading paper company and a global paper manufacturer, will explore the conditions and processes under which ESG strategies can address real-world challenges in the business environment and be implemented as sustainable management strategies.” 

Comments 2:

To clarify the main objective of the study. In different parts of the article, the authors mention three different main objectives of the article: 1. "this study aims to determine whether ESG management is not just a formal activity based on normative justification but a sustainable strategy with practical necessity and effectiveness in a realistic business environment"; 2. "This study was conducted to examine whether ESG management can function as a strategic tool that goes beyond meeting mere ethical and normative requirements and is linked to actual business performance"; 3. "aimed to provide a criterion for judging whether the increasing use of ESG strategies in corporate management will continue in the future or whether their use will be reduced or discontinued as a temporary fad". 

Therefore, it is not clear what is the main orientation of the study. The authors must clarify this so readers can understand the focus of the article. 

Response 2:

I sincerely agree with the reviewer's opinion and have clearly summarized the purpose and key questions of this paper in the introduction and throughout the content as follows.

1. We aim to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of business-based ESG management discussed in existing studies as a strategic means of solving specific business problems or achieving specific business outcomes.

2. We aim to identify the processes and conditions for linking specific business problems with ESG plans and implementation, and to propose academic and strategic directions for future ESG research.

Comments 3:

To review the titles/information of certain subtitles. Subtitle number 3 is called "Study Design" which suggest that it includes a description of the methodology/process used to get and analyze information. However, the subtitles numbers 3.1 and 3.2 include a brief context of the Korean economy, and of the company analyzed. Such titles may mislead the reader.

Response 3:

Based on the reviewer's comments, I have revised the table of contents of this paper as follows to clearly classify and organize the content.

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

3. Research Design

4. Analysis of ESG Strategies for Resolving Business Issues at Hansol Paper

5. Conclusions

The methodology mentioned in this table of contents has been clarified and covered in section 3, Research Design. For more details, please refer to pages 4-5 of the main text.

Comments 4:

To include information to have a better context. In the part related to the overview of the company it is necessary to include the number of workers, mission, vision, and organizational structure of the company to have a better understanding of the context of the organization subject of the study.

Response 4:

The requested content has been included in 4.1.1. Hansol Paper Overview. Please refer to pages 6-7 of the main text and Figure 1.

Comments 5:

To organize information. In the subtitle called “Characteristics of Paper Industry and Identification of Hansol Paper Business Issues” the authors began explaining environmental issues of the industry (they should include type of market, competition, etc., which are important matters related to the industry); then, the authors explain issued related to the company, and finally mentioned certain issued related to the Korean paper market. I recommend to cover everything related to the industry first, and then, concentrate on the company

Response 5:

As previously mentioned, the entire table of contents of this paper has been reorganized, and the relevant content is now covered in Sections 4.1.1. Hansol Paper Overview and 4.1.2. Environmental Changes in the Paper Industry and Business Issues at Hansol Paper.

However, the purpose of this structure is to first explain the overview of Hansol Paper, the case study company, to ensure representativeness and validity, and then use Section 4.1.2 to identify the business risks and issues faced by Hansol Paper. Therefore, the structure is not focused on the paper industry but aims to derive the risks and issues that Hansol Paper must address and analyze the process of planning and implementing ESG strategies to address them. The order has been maintained as is.

We have revised the sentences and explanations to clarify the meaning of this structure in accordance with the reviewer's feedback.

For more details, please refer to the relevant sections on pages 6-8 of the main text.

Comments 6:

To include a detailed explanation of the research process. In the subtitle 3.3 there is a brief explanation of the process, but more detail is necessary (for example, how many documents were chosen? what was the criteria to choose/discard a document? Is there a reason why audit reports for 2022/sustainability reports for 2021 were not included?

Response 6:

The relevant details are provided in Section 3.2, Analytical method, on page 5 of the main text.of this study in the context of existing studies.

1. Summary

We sincerely appreciate the reviewer's meaningful comments on this paper. We have revised the paper to make it more complete, reflecting the reviewer's comments.

We have made every effort to faithfully reflect the reviewer's comments. Please refer to the responses to the comments below and the revised manuscript uploaded for details on the revisions and additions.

2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Comments 1:

However, under IFRS S1 (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information), companies are already required to disclose ESG activities explicitly linked to corporate strategy and risk.
Therefore, the study’s practical implications may not appear highly distinctive.

Please clarify how your findings offer differentiated insights beyond what is already required by IFRS S1.
In addition, prior research related to IFRS S1 should be included in the literature review section to position the study within the current academic discourse.

Response 1:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We have actively incorporated the reviewer's comments and thoroughly examined the relevant content, including the section on “Changes in ESG strategy in compliance with IFRS S1·S2” in the Literature Review (see page 3 of the main text). Additionally, we have identified the following areas where further research is needed.

“As such, existing studies have examined the structural interpretation of IFRS S1 and S2 standards, the level of corporate response, and the market impact of disclosure from various perspectives. However, it is necessary to seek specific standards on how ESG disclosure should be integrated into corporate strategy and risk management.”

In particular, the practical implications of this paper contribute to the practical application of IFRS S1 and S2 standards as follows (see page 18 of the main text).

“In addition, with the global adoption of IFRS S1 standards, specific standards and processes can be applied to disclose how sustainability-related risks and opportunities affect business strategies, business models, and financial plans.”

Comments 2:

The study analyzes ESG practices based on the disclosures of a single company, which limits the generalizability and persuasiveness of the authors’ arguments.

•              Corporate disclosures often reflect formal and selective ESG efforts aimed primarily at improving ESG ratings, rather than presenting the company’s actual strategic implementation.

•              Furthermore, by focusing on only one case, the study does not adequately validate the effectiveness of ESG strategy integration in relation to corporate performance.

Please acknowledge the limitations of using corporate disclosures as a primary data source, and consider incorporating at least one additional company—preferably in the same industry but with contrasting ESG strategies or outcomes—for comparative analysis to enhance the credibility of the findings.

Response 2:

Since this paper conducts an in-depth analysis of a single case, the limitations of the research you pointed out exist. Therefore, the limitations of the single data source and the single case have been clearly presented in Section 5.3. Limitations and Future Research. (See page 19 of the main text.)

However, this study was conducted with the purpose of exploring the processes and conditions for integrating ESG strategies into business-based problem-solving through an in-depth analysis of actual corporate cases. Therefore, linking the findings to financial performance was not within the scope of this study. We kindly ask for your understanding regarding this point.

Additional comparative case studies within the same industry or various directions for future research have been suggested in Section 5.3. Limitations and Future Research.

1. Summary

We sincerely appreciate the reviewer's meaningful comments on this paper. We have revised the paper to make it more complete, reflecting the reviewer's comments.

We have made every effort to faithfully reflect the reviewer's comments. Please refer to the responses to the comments below and the revised manuscript uploaded for details on the revisions and additions.

 2. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Comments 1:

1. Research purpose: The definition of the concepts of "effectiveness" and "sustainability" is somewhat abstract. In particular, specific criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of ESG strategies are not clearly presented, making it difficult to intuitively understand the evaluation framework of the study.

Response 1:

This paper has been completely rewritten to reflect the opinions of the reviewers, including sections 1. Introduction, 2. Literature Review, and 5. Conclusions. Therefore, all unclear parts that were pointed out have been revised and reflected throughout the paper. Please refer to the rewritten introduction section for the relevant content.

I have clearly summarized the purpose and key questions of this paper in the introduction and throughout the content as follows.

1. We aim to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of business-based ESG management discussed in existing studies as a strategic means of solving specific business problems or achieving specific business outcomes.

2. We aim to identify the processes and conditions for linking specific business problems with ESG plans and implementation, and to propose academic and strategic directions for future ESG research. 

Comments 2:

2. Theoretical background:

1) Critical examination of the limitations and negative effects of ESG strategies is insufficient, and conflicting research results on the actual impact of ESG on the long-term value of a company need to be introduced as well.

Response 2:

Along with the revision of the table of contents of this paper, the relevant content has been completely rewritten in Section 2. Literature Review.

2.1. Integrating ESG and business strategy In this section, we have included a variety of recent studies on the integration of ESG and business strategy, which form the core basis of this paper, and based on this, we have presented the analytical objectives of this study as follows. While the diversity of recent studies has been enhanced, conflicting research findings on negative impacts were excluded as they were deemed not to represent theoretical gaps that this single case study could validate. Please understand this decision, and for further details, please refer to pages 2–3 of the main text.

Comments 3:

2) In addition, this paper analyzes the effectiveness and sustainability of Hansol Paper's ESG strategy as a case study, but the structural specificity of why Hansol Paper  should perform ESG in the Korean context needs to be more clearly mentioned. 

Response 3:

The requested information has been provided in detail in section 3.1. Subject of Analysis: Hansol Paper on page 4 of the main text and section 4.1.2. Environmental Changes in the Paper Industry and Business Issues at Hansol Paper on pages 7-8 of the main text.

Comments 4:

3. Methodology: The data collection and analysis process is not specifically described. There is a lack of explanation on how Hansol Paper's ESG strategy was actually derived and analyzed, and what procedures were followed to secure the reliability of the data. 

Response 4:

Please refer to the revised section 3. Research Design for details. In particular, additional explanations have been added to section 3.2. Analytical methods on page 5.

Comments 5:

4. The generalizability of the research results is limited by relying on a single corporate case. Comparative analysis with other companies (same industry, other industries) and additional review of various cases within the industry are necessary. Discussion on whether Hansol Paper's uniqueness can be applied to the entire industry should be supplemented. 

Response 5:

The points you mentioned have been accurately added and rewritten in section 5.3. Limitations and Future Research on page 19 of the main text.