Clarifying the Concept of Corporate Sustainability and Providing Convergence for Its Definition
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors present a review to address the question ‘What is Corporate Sustainability’ and Is it indeed true there is a lack of convergence and clarity over its concept? ‘. Authors use an Ontological Analysis and a Necessary Condition Analysis as methodological tools. The subject is interesting, but there are many major concerns as follows:
Introduction
Please, mention why it is necessary to generate a new concept or clarify the concept of Corporate Sustainability. How can this contribute to future studies? What implications can provide the answer to the following questions: What is Corporate Sustainability? Is it indeed true there is a lack of convergence and clarity over its concept? Although part of this rationale is addressed in the Literature Review section, it needs to be clearly mentioned in the Introduction.
The last paragraph of the Introduction (lines 99-106) mentions sections that do not correspond to the sections of the document. Please modify the content of the Introduction paragraph or modify the title and hierarchy of the sections that make up the manuscript.
A numbering must be reassigned to the sections of the article:
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methogology
4. Results and discussion
5. Conclusions
It is not worth dedicating so little space and paragraphs to the current Section 3 (Results), while the Literature Review takes up a large part of the article and appears as a subsection.
Literature review
Please, add a comparison table showing the contributions that other authors have made around the Corporate Sustainability concept. Highlight in the Table some elements such as approaches, contexts, pillars, etc. Include in that Table the contributions of Montiel & Delgado-Ceballos, Hahn et al., Bergman et al., Brundtland report, Frecè & Harder, Christen & Schmidt, Smith & Sharicz, Meuer et al., among others. The idea is to summarize in a table what currently exists in the literature around the concept of SC, and visualize the contribution that will be made in this study.
Methodology
Why did the authors not consider the Scopus database, but Web of Science and Google Scholar to search articles are fit for defining and conceptualizing CS?
The authors must add to the Methodology a figure summarizing the selection, exclusion, and inclusion of articles to be analyzed. Explain in the figure how the 132 articles were obtainesd, and from there, how they refined the documents until obtaining 81 articles?
Please reduce the length of the paragraph between lines 498-558 or split the paragraph into multiple paragraphs.
It is necessary to create a diagram or figure showing the comparison of concepts, scope, and points ideas between the following concepts: Sustainability, Sustainable Development, Corporate Sustainability, Corporate Social Responsibility. One of the main contributions of this article is to clarify concepts and definitions, so that readers can identify the scope of each one, and its relationship with other concepts.
Please check the writing style of the items mentioned on lines 247-252. It is suggested to use bullets. Check throughout the text the use of punctuation and spacing between words (see line 455).
Results and Discussion
It is necessary to illustrate the results, regarding which or how many documents address each of the dimensions that constitute Corporate Sustainability (Environmental, Social, Economic, Governance and Time dimensions). For example, create a table showing which articles address each of the five dimensions.
A subsection is needed in the Results and Discussion section that is literally titled "What' is Corporate Sustainability" and that is dedicated exclusively to explaining this concept, collecting everything addressed, analyzed, and identified throughout the article. It would be expected that the article leaves a clear and well-structured concept on the part of the authors, but it is not possible to identify it in the current state of the article.
Author Response
Please see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper is interesting, but there are some shortcomings:
1. In the Abstract section, (1) what’s the meaning of the abbreviation (CS), if it refers to corporate sustainability, the authors should mark it; (2) the authors should clearly show their contributions when compared to previous studies
2. In the Introduction section, (1) the authors should clearly show the aim of this paper; (2) the authors say “The remarkable contribution of Meuer et al. [2] has 73 encountered three relevant limitations.”, if so, do not necessary to show the limitations in detail in the following sentences; (3) the authors should provide more detailed contributions; (4) Some the latest references relevant to sustainable development are needed to add
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2022.01.016
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121278
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.102788
3. In the literature review section, the authors should also need to provide the latest references
4. In Materials and Methods, I do not see a clearly method description, and can separate a new section, namely “2.1 Methods”
5. In the Results section, the authors should clearly evidence their empirical results at the beginning of this section
6. In the Discussion section, this section is too long, the authors can merge these paragraphs, and delete redundant parts
7. In the Conclusion section, (1) the authors need to generalize their findings, rather than list the results; (2) the future research can be shown simply
Author Response
Please see attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have accepted the suggestions and have presented the necessary corrections to obtain a quality article.
Author Response
Updated manuscript uploaded. Upon suggestion from the editor we have included an additional reference in the literature review. We thank the reviewer for the valuable contribution
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
