Influence of Government Support on Proactive Environmental Strategies in Family Firms

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

I have read the paper „How Government Support Influence Proactive Environmental Strategies on Family Firms” with interest. Authors investigate the relationship between government support in family firms and their investment in environmental protection. In detail, they intend to analyze whether the family nature, and the government financial support, influence the environmental strategy. They study is based on a sample of 1,802 manufacturing firms in Spain (of which 43.6% are family firms). Nevertheless, I have several major and minor concerns with the manuscript, which prevents the paper in its current form from being of publishable standard in “Sustainability.” I will detail my concerns in the enclosed PDF. 

I wish the authors best of luck in improving their paper and hope that my comments help achieving the goal of publication.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for the review that certainly has increased the quality of our work for further publication. Here you can find the comments to your appraisal.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is well written, clear and organized in content. Well done! I suggest SOME CHANGES NECESSARY to make the paper publishable: 1) Justify why data from Spain are used: does it have any peculiarities that make it interesting to investigate the phenomenon in this country? 2) Clarify the concepts used as perfect substitutes: eco-innovation, environmental sustainable / protection, sustainability and innovation
3) Recall table 2 in the text and give the same attention to the 5 independent variables; 4) Clarify or correct the name of the dependent variable: the proxy does not represent the PROACTIVE environmental strategies but at most the environmental strategies ... if this is not true, you have to better explain why and anchor yourself to some previous studies; 5) When talking about Environmental attitudes / behaviors, you can mention the recent study: Cosma, S., Schwizer, P. M., Nobile, L., & Leopizzi, R. (2021). Environmental attitude on the board. Who are the "green directors"? Evidences from Italy. Business Strategy and the Environment.  

Author Response

Thank you for the review that certainly has increased the quality of our work for further publication. Here you can find the comments to your appraisal.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper with the title "How government support influence proactive environmental strategies on family firms" presents an interesting topic, however certain issues need to be clarified/ substantially improved. 

Remarks / recommendations:

*the paper title must be slightly changed; please keep this in mind; 

*the abstract must be clarified (scope, results, future research directions);

*the Literature Review section must be improved; Indeed, there are relatively few solid studies in the literature associated to this topic, but please 'look' further [and update];

*on section "3. Data Analysis and Methodology"-"3.2. Variables and measures" please develop and clarify the approach; it is not very clear for e.g what are the aspects associated to variables (e.g. Dependent). For EP you used only "Expenditures on environmental protection" (Y/N)?

*it would be advisable to improve the approach - section "3.3. Analysis methodology" considering even the approaches (literature) mentioned in this section;

*present/ mention clearly the theoretical and practical contribution of this article;

and so on.

Author Response

Thank you for the review that certainly has increased the quality of our work for further publication. Here you can find the comments to your appraisal.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

The subject of this article is very interesting and topical.
The abstract needs further development as it does not follow the requirements set by international journals. The abstract should include the background of the research, the objective, the methodology used, the main findings.
In the " Introduction" section, the authors define more specifically the research gap that this article is able to fill in the international academic community.
I miss the presentation of the limitations of the research and the possibilities for further research, and the absence of practical suggestions from the authors.

Please revise the paper from a formal point of view, the style of the references is not in line with the journal's requirements.

Author Response

Thank you for the review that certainly has increased the quality of our work for further publication. Here you can find the comments to your appraisal.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear authors,

thank you for the extensive revision of the manuscript. From my perspective, the quality of the manuscript has been significantly improved. 

I see potential for improvement especially in the use of the SEW as a theoretical framework. In parts, the integration of the SEW seems superficial. This is particularly noticeable in the summary and discussion, where the results could be increasingly explained by the SEW. Perhaps further operationalization of the theory, as suggested by Berrone et al. (2012), could help integrate the theory in more depth.

I wish the authors all the best for the improvement of the manuscript.

 

 

Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth in family firms: Theoretical dimensions, assessment approaches, and agenda for future research. Family Business Review, 25(3), 258-279.

Author Response

Dear reviewer.

 

Thank you again for your new suggestions which we consider have greatly improved the focus of our paper.

All the new corrections are highlighted in red color.

 

We have included the SEW theory as the main framework of our paper in the literature review, in the summary, in the discussion, in the conclusions and in the future research lines. Indeed, our work contributes empirically to support this line of research. We hope that this time we have included all the potential of the theory in our paper.

Thank you very much for your valuable contribution.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx