How to Embrace Sustainable Performance via Green Learning Orientation: A Moderated Mediating Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear respected Authors;

As I reviewed this paper, I have the following suggestion:

I think that this article deals with an interesting topic. I suspect it will become increasingly

important as an expert in "Corporate Social Responsibility" to become more popular. The

sustainable methods and models used in this paper are very significant, and they are applied

correctly in this paper in the interesting case study. However, I do believe that (in some parts), by

considering certain gaps and dispelling some existing issues, the research could result in higher

quality as what is presented. To do so, the following comments and recommendations are provided:

1. In the literature review part, you don’t need to have four different outlines, just report the logic behind each hypothesis.

2. Your conceptual model is too simple, and I don’t see any special analysis in this model. That’s why I suggest you add an SEM analysis to your paper. Simultaneously, I strongly suggest deleting all of the descriptive analysis (tables 1, 2; section 4.3), on the section (3.1 sample and data collection), and only reporting specific analysis.

3. From section (4.2 Reliability and Validity), I can see you have used AMOS and SPSS, so I suggest adding a simulation for the (AVE). The simulation can be done using (HTMT or MTMM).

4. Please update your reference list and add some more new references.

5. Please give references in the section (5. Discussion), refer to previous research and compare the products with previous research results, and add more details in the discussion part. Your discussion part should be longer, and you have to delete subsections in the discussion. For example, subsection (5.1 theoretical implications) needs to be reported as a new main section and can’t be a part of the discussion. The same thing for (5.2 managerial implications).

6. It is recommended that the authors check their grammar and scientific writing style.I believe that undertaking proofreading by a native writer could give me a better understanding of the actual concept of the research.

7. Theory and hypotheses section need to be more focused. Avoid irrelevant literature.

8. Even the authors performed Harman single factor test for CMV, but it is an old fashion. I strongly recommend the authors to perform Lindell and Whitney’s (2001) marker variable test to confirm the CMB.

References

 

1. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114.

Author Response

Title: How to embrace sustainable performance via green learning orientation: A moderated mediating model (sustainability-1737506)

 

Dear reviewer,

We very much appreciate your constructive comments and the approach that you adopted to the review process. You have paid attention to details and we know that this required a lot of your time. Your comments however have indeed assisted us significantly in improving the study and its potential contribution. Following your suggestions, we made a number of changes throughout the manuscript, increased precision in each section and clarified the issues you raised. Below, we include the points you made in italics and summarize the actions that we have taken to address them. (please note that the references mentioned here are included in the revised version of the manuscript)

 

1. In the literature review part, you don’t need to have four different outlines, just report the logic behind each hypothesis.

Response: Thank you for making this comment. To address your comment, we have revised the literature review part in Introduction. We highlighted the logic relationship among variables.

In the second paragraph and third paragraph of Introduction, we reviewed the relationship among green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance, and we found the research gaps. Prior literature has devoted much attention to verifying how organizational learning affects innovation and business performance [11]. For example, March [12] discussed the relationship between organizational learning and innovation. Vowles [13] suggested that organizational learning could help organizations achieve competitive advantage. To deal with the external pressure of environmental protection, enterprises should invest more resources into green innovation and sustainable development [14]. However, few studies have explored the specific pathway that green learning orientation affects sustainable performance. Specifically, the internal process and boundary conditions behind the above relationship have not been paid enough attention. Under this context, it is crucial to explore how green learning orientation affects sustainable performance of enterprises, including the mediating path and the boundary conditions.

Given that growing in a highly competitive environment, it is necessary for the enterprise to become a learning oriented or innovative organization [15]. Organizational learning is a knowledge-based resource capability that is critical for enterprises to strengthen the innovation ability and acquire performance in a changing and competitive environment [11]. Green learning orientation makes enterprises to acquire and create green knowledge, which means that enterprises can automatically and effectively transfer and use green knowledge [16]. Organizational learning theory highlights that learning from experience can change organizational behavior and thus improve the business performance [17]. Innovation is an important outcome of organizational learning, and enterprises can acquire, absorb, create and exploit new information and knowledge to explore new products, processes, and services [12]. Existing studies regard learning orientation as the degree to which an organization invests resources in learning activities [18]. A high-level learning oriented organization will actively enhance their capabilities and update the knowledge base [13]. Therefore, when enterprises can effectively apply the obtained green knowledge to green innovation, green learning orientation can bring higher sustainable performance. Some studies suggest that green innovation behavior can contribute to promoting the economic and environmental performance of enterprises [19], helping to achieve sustainable performance [20]. Therefore, we attempt to explore the mediating effect of green innovation behavior between green learning orientation and sustainable performance, in order to accurately understand how green learning orientation promotes sustainable performance.

 

2. Your conceptual model is too simple, and I don’t see any special analysis in this model. That’s why I suggest you add an SEM analysis to your paper. Simultaneously, I strongly suggest deleting all of the descriptive analysis (tables 1, 2; section 4.3), on the section (3.1 sample and data collection), and only reporting specific analysis.

 

Response: Thank you for making this comment. To address your comment, we have taken two actions. First, we added an SEM analysis to our paper on section 4.4 Robustness Test. As shown in Figure 3, green learning orientation positively affects green innovation behavior (β = 0.521, p < 0.001) and sustainable performance (β = 0.298, p < 0.001), and GIB positively affects sustainable performance. CSR is positively regulating green innovation behavior (β = 0.205, p < 0.001). The interaction between green learning orientation and CSR positively affects green innovation behavior (β = 0.278, p < 0.001). In addition, green learning orientation, CSR and the interaction are contributing and explaining the high-value variance of R2 of 39.1% on green innovation behavior, and green learning orientation and green innovation behavior are contributing and explaining the high-value variance of R2 of 24.2% on sustainable performance, suggesting that the most reliable relationship with all dependent variables. (see 4.4. Robustness Test section on page 11)

 

Figure 2. Results of structural model. Note: SP = sustainable performance; GLO = green learning orientation; GIB = green innovation behavior; CSRC= corporate social responsibility culture; similarly hereinafter.

Second, we delete all of the descriptive analysis (Table 1, Table 2 and section 4.3), and we only reported specific analysis on section 3.1Sample and Data Collection.

 

3. From section (4.2 Reliability and Validity), I can see you have used AMOS and SPSS, so I suggest adding a simulation for the (AVE). The simulation can be done using (HTMT or MTMM).

 

Response: Thank you for making this comment. To address your comment, we adopted HTMT to test the discriminant validity. We also adopted HTMT to test the discriminant validity. Following the suggestion of Hair et al. [46], the cut-off for HTMT should be less than 0.900. The results of HTMT in Table 3 showed that all the values between every two variables were less than 0.900, and indicated that the constructs were accepted and the discriminant validity was sufficient. As shown in Table 4, the correlation between the two latent constructs was less than the square root of the AVE estimates for each individual construct, indicating sufficient dis-criminant validity. (see 4.2. Reliability and Validity section on page 7)

Table 3. HTMT analysis.

Factors	SP	GLO	GIB	CSRC
SP	1.000
GLO	0.507	1.000
GIB	0.508	0.639	1.000
CSRC	0.080	0.239	0.329	1.000

 

4. Please update your reference list and add some more new references.

Response: Thank you for making this comment. We have updated our reference list. We added the new references as follows:

1. Lin, T.; Wang, L.; Wu, J. Environmental regulations, green technology innovation, and high-quality economic development in China: Application of mediation and threshold effects. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6882.
2. Wang, X.; Wu, S.; Qin, X.; La, M.; Zuo, H. Informal environment regulation, green technology innovation and air pollution: Quasi-natural experiments from prefectural cities in China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6333.
3. Adamowicz, M.; Green deal, green growth and green economy as a means of support for attaining the sustainable development goals. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5901.
4. Ma, Z.; Shu, G.; Wang, Q.; Wang, L. Sustainable governance and green innovation: A perspective from gender diversity in China’s listed companies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6403.
5. Zhang, D.; Wang, H.; Jin, X. Element matching and configuration path of corporate social responsibility p Sustainability 2022, 14, 6614.
6. Lau, A. K. W.; Lee, S. H. N.; Jung, S. The role of the institutional environment in the relationship between CSR and operational performance: An empirical study in Korean manufacturing industries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 834.
7. Lindell, M. K.; Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, 86(1), 114–121.
8. Malhotra, N. K.; Kim, S. S.; Patil, A. Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science 2006, 52(2), 1865–1883.
9. Chan, R. Y. K.; Lai, J. W. M.; Kim, N. Strategic motives and performance implications of proactive versus reactive environmental strategies in corporate sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 2022, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3011.
10. Hair, J. F.; Hult, G. T. M.; Ringle, C. M.; Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2017.
11. Thuy, C. M.; Trung, T. Q.; Khuong, N. V.; Liem, N. T. From corporate social responsibility to stock price crash risk: Modelling the mediating role of firm performance in an emerging market. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12557.
12. Thuy, C. M.; Khuong, N. V.; Canh, N. T.; Liem, N. T. The mediating effect of stock price crash risk on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and cost of equity moderated by state ownership: Moderated-mediation analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2022, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2276.
13. Baron, R. M.; Kenny, D. A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(6), 1173–1182.
14. Zhao, X.; Lynch, J. G. Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research2010, 37(2), 197–206.
15. Alerasoul, S. A.; Afeltra, G.; Hakala, H.; Minelli, E.; Strozzi, F. Organisational learning, learning organisation, and learning orientation: An integrative review and framework. Human Resource Management Review 2022, 32, 100854.
16. Baker, W. E.; Mukherjee, D.; Perin M. G. Learning orientation and competitive advantage: A critical synthesis and future directions. Journal of Business Research 2022, 144, 863-873.
17. Le, T. T. How do corporate social responsibility and green innovation transform corporate green strategy into sustainable firm performance? Journal of Cleaner Production 2022, 362,132228.
18. Torkkeli, L.; Durst, S. Corporate social responsibility of SMEs: Learning orientation and performance outcomes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6387.
19. Juntunen, J. K.; Halme, M.; Korsunova, A.; Rajala, R. Strategies for integrating stakeholders into sustainability innovation: A configurational perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management 2019, 36(3), 331–355.
20. Yildiz Çankaya, S.; Sezen, B. Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2019, 30 (1), 98-121.
21. Yusliza, M.-Y.; Yong, J. Y.; Tanveer, M. I.; Ramayah, T.; Faezah, J. N. A structural model of the impact of green intellectual capital on sustainable performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 249, 119334.
22. Sheng, M. L.; Chien, I. Rethinking organizational learning orientation on radical and incremental innovation in high-tech firms. Journal of Business Research 2016, 69(6), 2302-2308.
23. Lin, L.H.; Ho, Y.L. Institutional pressures and environmental performance in the global automotive industry: The mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Long Range Planning2016, 49 (6), 764-775.

 

5. Please give references in the section (5. Discussion), refer to previous research and compare the products with previous research results, and add more details in the discussion part. Your discussion part should be longer, and you have to delete subsections in the discussion. For example, subsection (5.1 theoretical implications) needs to be reported as a new main section and can’t be a part of the discussion. The same thing for (5.2 managerial implications).

 

Response: We agree with your point and we have made a major revision to the Discussion. We discuss the results from three aspects.

First, this paper finds that green learning orientation has a significant positive effect on sustainable performance, which supports the views of Aranda et al. [11]. Aranda et al. [11] suggested that concerning about environmental protection is conducive to the sustainable development of enterprises. Green learning orientation pays attention to green knowledge acquisition to sustain a competitive edge and deal with the external pressure about environmental protection [16]. Prior literature has suggested that learning orientation is important to business performance [51]. Learning orientation can facilitate organizations’ innovation capacity to achieve competitive advantage [51]. Green learning orientation enables the organization to pay more attention to the knowledge related to green production, which helps to improve the organization’s green innovation ability and enhance the legitimacy of the organization to deal with external environmental pressure [16]. All of these can help enterprises form differentiated competitive advantages and thus improve business performance [52]. This study expands the research background of existing literature and explores the impact of learning orientation on firm performance from the perspective of sustainability. Enterprises with a strong green learning orientation can acquire green knowledge, enhance the green organizational capacity, and strengthen the legitimacy, which can promote the sustainable performance.

Second, this study has investigated the mediating role of green innovation behavior in the relationship between green learning orientation and sustainable performance based on organizational learning theory. The result indicates that green innovation behavior plays a crucial role in the transformation of green learning orientation into sustainable performance. The conclusion suggests that green learning orientation can facilitate employees to learn the green knowledge to develop green innovative behavior, which is consistent with the view of Wang et al. [10]. Further, some studies show that green innovation behavior is pivotal to improving sustainable performance of enterprises [10, 20]. Manufacturing enterprises need to obtain differentiated competitive advantages through green innovation and achieve financial performance while coping with environmental pressure [24]. The results of our study are consistent with these views that green learning orientation can improve sustainable performance by promoting green innovative behaviors. Green learning orientation promotes enterprises to enrich the green knowledge basis, which will facilitate green innovation behavior, and then will promote the sustainable development of manufacturing enterprises.

Third, CSR plays a crucial moderating role between green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance. This study reveals how green learning orientation affects sustainable performance via green innovation behavior under the condition of CSR. The stronger CSR, the greater the positive indirect effect of green learning orientation on sustainable performance via green innovation behavior, which is same to the points mentioned by Le [53] and Torkkeli and Durst [54]. They suggested that environmental protection is a part of CSR, and CSR reflects organizational members’ values and beliefs on environmental protection issues. Under the condition of high CSR, organizational members pay more attention to environmental issues [37], which improves enterprises’ ability to acquire information and knowledge resources, promotes enterprises to carry out green innovation to cope with environmental protection regulations, and ultimately improves enterprises’ sustainable performance [53]. (see 5.1. Discussion section on page 12)

In addition, we reported subsections (5.2 theoretical implications and 5.3 managerial implications) as a new main section and can’t be a part of the discussion. (see page 13-14)

 

6. It is recommended that the authors check their grammar and scientific writing style. I believe that undertaking proofreading by a native writer could give me a better understanding of the actual concept of the research.

 

Response: Thank you for your advice. We used a professional language editing service where editors have improved our writing English. And we have revised and proofread the grammar, punctuation, reference formats of the articles, and asked professional companies to make professional modifications to ensure that they adhere to the requirements of the journal.

 

7. Theory and hypotheses section need to be more focused. Avoid irrelevant literature.

Response: Thank you for the helpful suggestions. We have revised the Theory and hypotheses section to avoid irrelevant literature. For example, we deleted the original sentences “The green learning oriented enterprises have a strong green organizational identification, which will strengthen the environmental protection belief of enterprise employees, and eventually form a common corporate culture vision [30]. The green organizational vision facilitates employees to learn how to solve environmental problems, which will help eliminate the uncertainty of green innovation and improve the opportunity of green innovation success [31].” In 2.2. Green Learning Orientation and Green Innovation Behavior section, we deleted the original references [30] and [31]. Then, we revised this section as follows:

“Green learning orientation affects the learning direction of enterprises and the attitude of employees to acquire new skills [33], guides employees to create and exploit green knowledge, and can promote employees to actively participate in green innovation [34]. Under the influence of knowledge sharing values, employees will think actively about how to acquire and exchange knowledge [16], which will strengthen employees’ ideas of environmental management and promote green innovation behavior. Specifically, green learning orientation makes organizations to invest resources into acquiring knowledge related to green production, thus enriching the green knowledge base of organizations [16]. Furthermore, abundant green knowledge will contribute to green innovation [2]. Therefore, green learning orientation is conducive for enterprises to acquiring, sharing, and creating environmental knowledge about consumers and the market, and exploring new ideas about green innovation.” (see the second paragraph of 2.2. Green Learning Orientation and Green Innovation Behavior section)

We also deleted the original sentences “environmental management has become a crucial part of the enterprise management strategy [34]. Environmental management or green innovation strategy facilitate enterprises acquire competitive advantage and financial revenue from green production [35].” In 2.4. The Moderating Role of CSR section, we deleted the original references [34] and [35]. And then, we revised this section as follows:

“CSR refers to an organizational culture of voluntarily considering social and environmental issues in the process of interaction with stakeholders [23]. CSR also reflects the corporate values that shape the green management style and pay attention to social issues [36]. To address the pressure of environmental protection, enterprises have incorporated CSR into an important part of business strategic management [37]. Enterprises with high CSR attach importance to environmental protection and sustainable development, and integrate the concept of environmental protection into the product creation and process innovation [27]. These organizations pay more attention to the balance between business operations and environmental protection [38].” (see the first paragraph of 2.4. The Moderating Role of CSR section on page 4)

 

8. Even the authors performed Harman single factor test for CMV, but it is an old fashion. I strongly recommend the authors to perform Lindell and Whitney’s (2001) marker variable test to confirm the CMB.

References

1. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114.

Response: Thank you for your comment. We reviewed the study of Lindell and Whitney (2001). We agree with you that marker variable method is better to test CMV. We used the marker variable technique based on Lindell and Whitney’s [43] study to test CMV. According to the study of Malhotra et al. [44] and Chan et al. [45], we adopted the respondent’s working function as the marker variable, which should be theoretically irrelevant to other variables. The average correlation between the marker variable and the variables of conceptual model was represented by rm (rm = 0.026). We used the t test to examine if ru and ra were different significantly. The results showed that the change (ru-ra) of correlation coefficients for all constructs was not significant when the effect of rm was removed. Therefore, CMV of this study may not be a serious problem.

In addition, according to the study of Podsakoff et al. [42], we also added a single-common-method-factor approach to further verify the CMV based on Podsakoff et al. [42]. The results showed that the CMV in this study was not a serious concern.

 

References

Lindell, M. K.; Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, 86(1), 114-121.

Malhotra, N. K.; Kim, S. S.; Patil, A. Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science 2006, 52(2), 1865–1883.

Chan, R. Y. K.; Lai, J. W. M.; Kim, N. Strategic motives and performance implications of proactive versus reactive environmental strategies in corporate sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 2022, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3011.

Podsakoff, P. M.; Mackenzie, S. B.; Lee, J. Y.; Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 2003, 8(5), 879–903.

 

Again, thank you very much indeed for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. They have been particularly useful in further developing our study.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments for Author

 

1. Introduction

The author has explained the existence of research gaps but did not mention the reference articles. Preferably, the author mentions those articles. Besides, it would be better if the article could be elaborated.

 

2. Literature Review and Hypothesis

- The author has referred to articles that match the topic, but it is better to add references to articles published in the Sustainability journal

- Authors should also refer to articles published in the last three years so that the references are more up-to-date

 

3. Methodology

Did the author do a pilot test? If so, were there any changes in the contents of the questionnaire after the pilot test? If there are, it is better to explain these changes.

 

4. Discussion

The findings are a good basis for discussion, but they need more conceptualization to make the contribution of the research more evident. Preferably, the author explains the correlation of statistical results with actual conditions in the manufacturing industry in China

Author Response

Title: How to embrace sustainable performance via green learning orientation: A moderated mediating model (sustainability-1737506)

 

Dear reviewer,

We very much appreciate your constructive comments and the approach that you adopted to the review process. You have paid attention to details and we know that this required a lot of your time. Your comments however have indeed assisted us significantly in improving the study and its potential contribution. Following your suggestions, we made a number of changes throughout the manuscript, increased precision in each section and clarified the issues you raised. Below, we include the points you made in italics and summarize the actions that we have taken to address them. (please note that the references mentioned here are included in the revised version of the manuscript)

 

1.Introduction

The author has explained the existence of research gaps but did not mention the reference articles. Preferably, the author mentions those articles. Besides, it would be better if the article could be elaborated.

Response: We agree with your point and we have made a revision to Introduction to clarify the existence of research gaps and make it elaborated. We summarized the main concerns of the existing literature, and we found that there was still insufficient research on the relationship between green learning orientation and sustainable performance.

In the second paragraph and third paragraph of Introduction, we reviewed the relationship among green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance, and we found the research gaps. (see the page 1 to 2)

In the fourth paragraph, we reviewed the studies about CSR and suggested that the effect of green learning orientation on sustainable performance via green innovation behavior may depend on CSR. (see the third paragraph on page 2)

 

2.Literature Review and Hypothesis

- The author has referred to articles that match the topic, but it is better to add references to articles published in the Sustainability journal

- Authors should also refer to articles published in the last three years so that the references are more up-to-date

Response: Thank you for making this comment. We have updated our reference list published in the last three years and in the Sustainability journal. We added the new references as follows:

1. Lin, T.; Wang, L.; Wu, J. Environmental regulations, green technology innovation, and high-quality economic development in China: Application of mediation and threshold effects. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6882.
2. Wang, X.; Wu, S.; Qin, X.; La, M.; Zuo, H. Informal environment regulation, green technology innovation and air pollution: Quasi-natural experiments from prefectural cities in China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6333.
3. Adamowicz, M.; Green deal, green growth and green economy as a means of support for attaining the sustainable development goals. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5901.
4. Ma, Z.; Shu, G.; Wang, Q.; Wang, L. Sustainable governance and green innovation: A perspective from gender diversity in China’s listed companies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6403.
5. Zhang, D.; Wang, H.; Jin, X. Element matching and configuration path of corporate social responsibility p Sustainability 2022, 14, 6614.
6. Lau, A. K. W.; Lee, S. H. N.; Jung, S. The role of the institutional environment in the relationship between CSR and operational performance: An empirical study in Korean manufacturing industries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 834.
7. Lindell, M. K.; Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, 86(1), 114–121.
8. Malhotra, N. K.; Kim, S. S.; Patil, A. Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science 2006, 52(2), 1865–1883.
9. Chan, R. Y. K.; Lai, J. W. M.; Kim, N. Strategic motives and performance implications of proactive versus reactive environmental strategies in corporate sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 2022, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3011.
10. Hair, J. F.; Hult, G. T. M.; Ringle, C. M.; Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2017.
11. Thuy, C. M.; Trung, T. Q.; Khuong, N. V.; Liem, N. T. From corporate social responsibility to stock price crash risk: Modelling the mediating role of firm performance in an emerging market. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12557.
12. Thuy, C. M.; Khuong, N. V.; Canh, N. T.; Liem, N. T. The mediating effect of stock price crash risk on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and cost of equity moderated by state ownership: Moderated-mediation analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2022, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2276.
13. Baron, R. M.; Kenny, D. A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(6), 1173–1182.
14. Zhao, X.; Lynch, J. G. Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research2010, 37(2), 197–206.
15. Alerasoul, S. A.; Afeltra, G.; Hakala, H.; Minelli, E.; Strozzi, F. Organisational learning, learning organisation, and learning orientation: An integrative review and framework. Human Resource Management Review 2022, 32, 100854.
16. Baker, W. E.; Mukherjee, D.; Perin M. G. Learning orientation and competitive advantage: A critical synthesis and future directions. Journal of Business Research 2022, 144, 863-873.
17. Le, T. T. How do corporate social responsibility and green innovation transform corporate green strategy into sustainable firm performance? Journal of Cleaner Production 2022, 362,132228.
18. Torkkeli, L.; Durst, S. Corporate social responsibility of SMEs: Learning orientation and performance outcomes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6387.
19. Juntunen, J. K.; Halme, M.; Korsunova, A.; Rajala, R. Strategies for integrating stakeholders into sustainability innovation: A configurational perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management 2019, 36(3), 331–355.
20. Yildiz Çankaya, S.; Sezen, B. Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2019, 30 (1), 98-121.
21. Yusliza, M.-Y.; Yong, J. Y.; Tanveer, M. I.; Ramayah, T.; Faezah, J. N. A structural model of the impact of green intellectual capital on sustainable performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 249, 119334.
22. Sheng, M. L.; Chien, I. Rethinking organizational learning orientation on radical and incremental innovation in high-tech firms. Journal of Business Research 2016, 69(6), 2302-2308.
23. Lin, L.H.; Ho, Y.L. Institutional pressures and environmental performance in the global automotive industry: The mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Long Range Planning2016, 49 (6), 764-775.

 

3.Methodology

Did the author do a pilot test? If so, were there any changes in the contents of the questionnaire after the pilot test? If there are, it is better to explain these changes.

Response: Thank you for making this comment. All scales in this study were used previously in existing literature. First, two English professional translators and one management expert were invited to translate all the original English scales into Chinese and conduct reverse translation. Second, twelve business managers were asked to test the comprehension of the translated language and the ambiguity to verify whether the content validity of the translated scale is good. Therefore, we did not do a pilot test. In our reliability and validity test, we adopted several methods. The results show that all the scales have good reliability and validity (see 3.2. Measurement of Variables section on page 6 and 4.2. Reliability and Validity section on page 7).

 

4.Discussion

The findings are a good basis for discussion, but they need more conceptualization to make the contribution of the research more evident. Preferably, the author explains the correlation of statistical results with actual conditions in the manufacturing industry in China

Response: Thank you for making this comment. We have revised the discussion and contributions. We discuss the findings from three aspects.

First, this paper finds that green learning orientation has a significant positive effect on sustainable performance, which supports the views of Aranda et al. [11]. Aranda et al. [11] suggested that concerning about environmental protection is conducive to the sustainable development of enterprises. Green learning orientation pays attention to green knowledge acquisition to sustain a competitive edge and deal with the external pressure about environmental protection [16]. Prior literature has suggested that learning orientation is important to business performance [51]. Learning orientation can facilitate organizations’ innovation capacity to achieve competitive advantage [51]. Green learning orientation enables the organization to pay more attention to the knowledge related to green production, which helps to improve the organization’s green innovation ability and enhance the legitimacy of the organization to deal with external environmental pressure [16]. All of these can help enterprises form differentiated competitive advantages and thus improve business performance [52]. This study expands the research background of existing literature and explores the impact of learning orientation on firm performance from the perspective of sustainability. Enterprises with a strong green learning orientation can acquire green knowledge, enhance the green organizational capacity, and strengthen the legitimacy, which can promote the sustainable performance.

Second, this study has investigated the mediating role of green innovation behavior in the relationship between green learning orientation and sustainable performance based on organizational learning theory. The result indicates that green innovation behavior plays a crucial role in the transformation of green learning orientation into sustainable performance. The conclusion suggests that green learning orientation can facilitate employees to learn the green knowledge to develop green innovative behavior, which is consistent with the view of Wang et al. [10]. Further, some studies show that green innovation behavior is pivotal to improving sustainable performance of enterprises [10, 20]. Manufacturing enterprises need to obtain differentiated competitive advantages through green innovation and achieve financial performance while coping with environmental pressure [24]. The results of our study are consistent with these views that green learning orientation can improve sustainable performance by promoting green innovative behaviors. Green learning orientation promotes enterprises to enrich the green knowledge basis, which will facilitate green innovation behavior, and then will promote the sustainable development of manufacturing enterprises.

Third, CSR plays a crucial moderating role between green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance. This study reveals how green learning orientation affects sustainable performance via green innovation behavior under the condition of CSR. The stronger CSR, the greater the positive indirect effect of green learning orientation on sustainable performance via green innovation behavior, which is same to the points mentioned by Le [53] and Torkkeli and Durst [54]. They suggested that environmental protection is a part of CSR, and CSR reflects organizational members’ values and beliefs on environmental protection issues. Under the condition of high CSR, organizational members pay more attention to environmental issues [37], which improves enterprises’ ability to acquire information and knowledge resources, promotes enterprises to carry out green innovation to cope with environmental protection regulations, and ultimately improves enterprises’ sustainable performance [53]. (see 5.1. Discussion section on page 12)

Then, we reported subsections (5.2 theoretical implications and 5.3 managerial implications) as a new main section. (see page 13-14)

 

Again, thank you very much indeed for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. They have been particularly useful in further developing our study.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

I find your article interesting. To further improve it, I suggest the following:

1. Check grammar and typos. For example, line 277 (form), lines 65 + 66 are an incomplete sentence. The format of tables also needs improvement, e.g., Table 5. 

2. Research context: it would be better to clarify why China is chosen as a research setting. Is it different from some other countries that makes it important to carry out this research? 

3. Sampling: it would be better to clarify more about the sampled firms. For example, how did you decide to send the questionnaires? Is it convenient sampling or what? 

4. The term CSR culture: in the Conceptual framework, you wrote "CSR" only. You mentioned CSR culture some where in the text, but I can't see the difference between CSR and CSR culture in your text here. Please consider using just CSR.

5. Result interpretation: you need to compare and contrast the results with other relevant studies, to see if the findings help reconcile any inconsistency or the study even reveals new avenue for future research. This is really important. 

6. There are some other methods to ascertain the mediating effect, please review, for example, consider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.2276 

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12557

You should explain why you choose your approach rather than other methods here.

 

Author Response

Title: How to embrace sustainable performance via green learning orientation: A moderated mediating model (sustainability-1737506)

 

Dear reviewer,

We very much appreciate your constructive comments and the approach that you adopted to the review process. You have paid attention to details and we know that this required a lot of your time. Your comments however have indeed assisted us significantly in improving the study and its potential contribution. Following your suggestions, we made a number of changes throughout the manuscript, increased precision in each section and clarified the issues you raised. Below, we include the points you made in italics and summarize the actions that we have taken to address them. (please note that the references mentioned here are included in the revised version of the manuscript)

 

I find your article interesting. To further improve it, I suggest the following:

1. Check grammar and typos. For example, line 277 (form), lines 65 + 66 are an incomplete sentence. The format of tables also needs improvement, e.g., Table 5.

Response: Thank you for making this comment. We used a professional language editing service where editors have improved our writing English. And we have revised and proofread the grammar, punctuation, reference formats of the articles, and asked professional companies to make professional modifications to ensure that they adhere to the requirements of the journal. And the format of tables has been improved according to the journal requirements.

 

2. Research context: it would be better to clarify why China is chosen as a research setting. Is it different from some other countries that makes it important to carry out this research?

Response: Thank you for your advice. We have revised the first paragraph of the section (3.1. Samples and Data Collection) to clarify why China is chosen as a research setting. With the rapid development of China’s economy, the environmental problem has become a crucial issue of great concern to the Chinese government. The Chinese government calls for green, eco-friendly, high-efficiency and sustainable development. To pursue dual carbon goals (carbon peaking and carbon neutrality) and promote the construction of ecological civilization and green development, China’s government has paid much attention to economic development and ecological sustainability. Manufacturing is pivotal for the rapid economic growth of China, which is also one of the biggest industries that cause resource consumption and environmental pollution. It is crucial to explore the sustainable development of Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Therefore, the Chinese manufacturing enterprises were selected for the questionnaire survey. (see 3.1. Samples and Data Collection section on page 5)

3. Sampling: it would be better to clarify more about the sampled firms. For example, how did you decide to send the questionnaires? Is it convenient sampling or what?

Response: Thank you for your advice. To address your comment, we have added the more details about our survey in the third paragraph of section (3.1. Samples and Data Collection). We adopted the convenient sampling method to acquire the data.

From October 2020 to May 2021, we acquired a list of enterprises with the help of MBA and EMBA alumni, training institutions with a cooperative relationship, and professional market research companies. We contacted the middle and senior managers or the man-agers of technical departments to answer the questionnaire. Questionnaires were distributed to the middle and senior managers and technical department managers of manufacturing enterprises in northeast China and the Yangtze River Delta region by field investigation and email. Then, we used snowballing method to acquire more enterprises, which is conducive to acquiring data from hard-to-reach respondents [2]. The answering is anonymous and the results would be provided to the respondents to promote the valid response. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed and 243 questionnaires were obtained, including 193 valid questionnaires, with an effective recovery rate of 38.6%. (see the third paragraph of 3.1. Samples and Data Collection section on page 6)

4. The term CSR culture: in the Conceptual framework, you wrote "CSR" only. You mentioned CSR culture some where in the text, but I can't see the difference between CSR and CSR culture in your text here. Please consider using just CSR.

Response: Thank you for your comment. We revised the “CSR culture” to “CSR” to keep the text same.

 

5. Result interpretation: you need to compare and contrast the results with other relevant studies, to see if the findings help reconcile any inconsistency or the study even reveals new avenue for future research. This is really important.

Response: We agree with your point and we have made a major revision to the Discussion. We discuss the results from three aspects.

First, this paper finds that green learning orientation has a significant positive effect on sustainable performance, which supports the views of Aranda et al. [11]. Aranda et al. [11] suggested that concerning about environmental protection is conducive to the sustainable development of enterprises. Green learning orientation pays attention to green knowledge acquisition to sustain a competitive edge and deal with the external pressure about environmental protection [16]. Prior literature has suggested that learning orientation is important to business performance [51]. Learning orientation can facilitate organizations’ innovation capacity to achieve competitive advantage [51]. Green learning orientation enables the organization to pay more attention to the knowledge related to green production, which helps to improve the organization’s green innovation ability and enhance the legitimacy of the organization to deal with external environmental pressure [16]. All of these can help enterprises form differentiated competitive advantages and thus improve business performance [52]. This study expands the research background of existing literature and explores the impact of learning orientation on firm performance from the perspective of sustainability. Enterprises with a strong green learning orientation can acquire green knowledge, enhance the green organizational capacity, and strengthen the legitimacy, which can promote the sustainable performance.

Second, this study has investigated the mediating role of green innovation behavior in the relationship between green learning orientation and sustainable performance based on organizational learning theory. The result indicates that green innovation behavior plays a crucial role in the transformation of green learning orientation into sustainable performance. The conclusion suggests that green learning orientation can facilitate employees to learn the green knowledge to develop green innovative behavior, which is consistent with the view of Wang et al. [10]. Further, some studies show that green innovation behavior is pivotal to improving sustainable performance of enterprises [10, 20]. Manufacturing enterprises need to obtain differentiated competitive advantages through green innovation and achieve financial performance while coping with environmental pressure [24]. The results of our study are consistent with these views that green learning orientation can improve sustainable performance by promoting green innovative behaviors. Green learning orientation promotes enterprises to enrich the green knowledge basis, which will facilitate green innovation behavior, and then will promote the sustainable development of manufacturing enterprises.

Third, CSR plays a crucial moderating role between green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance. This study reveals how green learning orientation affects sustainable performance via green innovation behavior under the condition of CSR. The stronger CSR, the greater the positive indirect effect of green learning orientation on sustainable performance via green innovation behavior, which is same to the points mentioned by Le [53] and Torkkeli and Durst [54]. They suggested that environmental protection is a part of CSR, and CSR reflects organizational members’ values and beliefs on environmental protection issues. Under the condition of high CSR, organizational members pay more attention to environmental issues [37], which improves enterprises’ ability to acquire information and knowledge resources, promotes enterprises to carry out green innovation to cope with environmental protection regulations, and ultimately improves enterprises’ sustainable performance [53]. (see 5.1. Discussion section on page 12)

 

6. There are some other methods to ascertain the mediating effect, please review, for example, consider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/csr.2276

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/22/12557

You should explain why you choose your approach rather than other methods here.

Response: Thank you for your advice. First, we adopted three-step procedure to verify the mediating effect in the section (4.3.2. Mediating Analysis section). Then, we used Sobel test to further verify the mediating effect of green innovation behavior based on Thuy et al.’s [47, 48] studies. The results in Table 6 show that the mediating influence of green innovation behavior on the relationship between green learning orientation and sustainable performance is significant. According to Baron and Kenny’s [49] methodology, green innovation behavior plays a partial mediating role between green learning orientation and sustainable performance. According to Zhao et al.’s [50] study, the mediation of green innovation behavior is complementary. The results in Table 6 show that the mediating effect of green innovation behavior on the link between green learning orientation and sustainable performance accounts for 34.2% of the overall effect. The indirect effect is more than the half of direct effect. Therefore, green learning orientation has a positive effect on the sustainable performance, with green innovation behavior as a mediator (see Table 6). (see the third paragraph of 4.3.2. Mediating Analysis section on page 9)

 

References:

Thuy, C. T. M.; Trung, T. Q.; Khuong, N. V.; Liem, N. T. From corporate social responsibility to stock price crash risk: Modelling the mediating role of firm performance in an emerging market. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12557.

Thuy, C. T. M.; Khuong, N. V.; Canh, N. T.; Liem, N. T. The mediating effect of stock price crash risk on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and cost of equity moderated by state ownership: Moderated-mediation analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2022, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2276

Zhao, X.; Lynch, J. G. Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research 2010, 37(2), 197–206..     

Baron, R. M.; Kenny, D. A. The Moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(6), 1173–1182.

 

Again, thank you very much indeed for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. They have been particularly useful in further developing our study.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In most of this paper, the writing and empirical tests are sufficiently documented to be published. However, this study asserts that there have been few previous studies empirically confirming its hypotheses. I just hope to know that the prior studies cited in this study are not the empirical studies that provide similar hypotheses and that you point out your differences from these previous studies.

For example, for the Taiwanese sample, paper 5 seems to use hypotheses similar to hypotheses 1 and 2 of this paper.

In Paper 10, a hypothesis similar to hypothesis 2 of this paper is found for the Chinese sample.

 

My judge is that sufficiency is accomplished for the rest of the paper to be published.

Author Response

Title: How to embrace sustainable performance via green learning orientation: A moderated mediating model (sustainability-1737506)

 

Dear reviewer,

We very much appreciate your constructive comments and the approach that you adopted to the review process. You have paid attention to details and we know that this required a lot of your time. Your comments however have indeed assisted us significantly in improving the study and its potential contribution. Following your suggestions, we made a number of changes throughout the manuscript, increased precision in each section and clarified the issues you raised. Below, we include the points you made in italics and summarize the actions that we have taken to address them. (please note that the references mentioned here are included in the revised version of the manuscript)

 

In most of this paper, the writing and empirical tests are sufficiently documented to be published. However, this study asserts that there have been few previous studies empirically confirming its hypotheses. I just hope to know that the prior studies cited in this study are not the empirical studies that provide similar hypotheses and that you point out your differences from these previous studies.

For example, for the Taiwanese sample, paper 5 seems to use hypotheses similar to hypotheses 1 and 2 of this paper.

In Paper 10, a hypothesis similar to hypothesis 2 of this paper is found for the Chinese sample.

 

My judge is that sufficiency is accomplished for the rest of the paper to be published.

 

Response: We very much appreciate your constructive comments and the approach that you adopted to the review process. You have paid attention to details and we know that this required a lot of your time. Your comments however have indeed assisted us significantly in improving the study and its potential contribution. Following your suggestions and other reviewers’ comments, we made a number of changes throughout the manuscript, increased precision in each section and clarified the issues you raised.

First, we have revised the Introduction. In the first paragraph, we describe the research background. The second and the third paragraphs describe the relationship among green learning orientation, green innovation behavior and sustainable performance, and we found the research gaps. The fourth describes the studies about CSR and suggested that the effect of green learning orientation on sustainable performance via green innovation behavior may depend on CSR.

Second, we have revised the 2. Hypotheses section. We have updated our reference list published in the last three years and in the Sustainability journal. As follows,

1. Lin, T.; Wang, L.; Wu, J. Environmental regulations, green technology innovation, and high-quality economic development in China: Application of mediation and threshold effects. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6882.
2. Wang, X.; Wu, S.; Qin, X.; La, M.; Zuo, H. Informal environment regulation, green technology innovation and air pollution: Quasi-natural experiments from prefectural cities in China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6333.
3. Adamowicz, M.; Green deal, green growth and green economy as a means of support for attaining the sustainable development goals. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5901.
4. Ma, Z.; Shu, G.; Wang, Q.; Wang, L. Sustainable governance and green innovation: A perspective from gender diversity in China’s listed companies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6403.
5. Zhang, D.; Wang, H.; Jin, X. Element matching and configuration path of corporate social responsibility p Sustainability 2022, 14, 6614.
6. Lau, A. K. W.; Lee, S. H. N.; Jung, S. The role of the institutional environment in the relationship between CSR and operational performance: An empirical study in Korean manufacturing industries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 834.
7. Lindell, M. K.; Whitney, D. J. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 2001, 86(1), 114–121.
8. Malhotra, N. K.; Kim, S. S.; Patil, A. Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science 2006, 52(2), 1865–1883.
9. Chan, R. Y. K.; Lai, J. W. M.; Kim, N. Strategic motives and performance implications of proactive versus reactive environmental strategies in corporate sustainable development. Business Strategy and the Environment 2022, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3011.
10. Hair, J. F.; Hult, G. T. M.; Ringle, C. M.; Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2017.
11. Thuy, C. M.; Trung, T. Q.; Khuong, N. V.; Liem, N. T. From corporate social responsibility to stock price crash risk: Modelling the mediating role of firm performance in an emerging market. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12557.
12. Thuy, C. M.; Khuong, N. V.; Canh, N. T.; Liem, N. T. The mediating effect of stock price crash risk on the relationship between corporate social responsibility and cost of equity moderated by state ownership: Moderated-mediation analysis. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2022, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2276.
13. Baron, R. M.; Kenny, D. A. The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(6), 1173–1182.
14. Zhao, X.; Lynch, J. G. Jr.; Chen, Q. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research2010, 37(2), 197–206.
15. Alerasoul, S. A.; Afeltra, G.; Hakala, H.; Minelli, E.; Strozzi, F. Organisational learning, learning organisation, and learning orientation: An integrative review and framework. Human Resource Management Review 2022, 32, 100854.
16. Baker, W. E.; Mukherjee, D.; Perin M. G. Learning orientation and competitive advantage: A critical synthesis and future directions. Journal of Business Research 2022, 144, 863-873.
17. Le, T. T. How do corporate social responsibility and green innovation transform corporate green strategy into sustainable firm performance? Journal of Cleaner Production 2022, 362,132228.
18. Torkkeli, L.; Durst, S. Corporate social responsibility of SMEs: Learning orientation and performance outcomes. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6387.
19. Juntunen, J. K.; Halme, M.; Korsunova, A.; Rajala, R. Strategies for integrating stakeholders into sustainability innovation: A configurational perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management 2019, 36(3), 331–355.
20. Yildiz Çankaya, S.; Sezen, B. Effects of green supply chain management practices on sustainability performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 2019, 30 (1), 98-121.
21. Yusliza, M.-Y.; Yong, J. Y.; Tanveer, M. I.; Ramayah, T.; Faezah, J. N. A structural model of the impact of green intellectual capital on sustainable performance. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 249, 119334.
22. Sheng, M. L.; Chien, I. Rethinking organizational learning orientation on radical and incremental innovation in high-tech firms. Journal of Business Research 2016, 69(6), 2302-2308.
23. Lin, L.H.; Ho, Y.L. Institutional pressures and environmental performance in the global automotive industry: The mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Long Range Planning2016, 49 (6), 764-775.

And we have revised the hypotheses section to avoid irrelevant literature.

Third, we have revised the 3.Research Methodology section. We describe the reason why we chose the Chinese manufacturing enterprises as the samples. We deleted the original Table 1 and Table 2, and we only reported specific analysis on section 3.1Sample and Data Collection.

Fourth, we have revised 4. Results section. We added two new methods (single-common-method-factor approach and marker variable technique) to test CMV based on the study of Podsakoff et al. [42], Lindell and Whitney [43], Malhotra et al. [44] and Chan et al. [45]. And we also adopted HTMT to test the discriminant validity [46]. Then, we adopted Sobel test to further verify the mediating effect based on Thuy et al.’s [47, 48] studies. And in 4.4. Robustness Test section, we added the SEM to test the conceptual model to verify the results’ stability.

Fifth, we have made a major revision to the Discussion section. We discuss the results from three aspects, and we added more details in the discussion part to refer to previous research and compare the products with previous research results. In addition, we reported subsections (5.2 theoretical implications and 5.3 managerial implications) as a new main section and can’t be a part of the discussion.

Sixth, we used a professional language editing service where editors have improved our writing English. And we have revised and proofread the grammar, punctuation, reference formats of the articles, and asked professional companies to make professional modifications to ensure that they adhere to the requirements of the journal.

 

Again, thank you very much indeed for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. They have been particularly useful in further developing our study.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors,

I find that you have made efforts in improving the paper. I generally agree with what you have in the revised version. However, I would only ask for 2 minor changes:

1. Move the explanation for the choice of China as the research setting to the introduction.

2. If your sampling is actually of convenient type, please acknowledge the associated limitation in the conclusion.

That's all. 

Thank you.

Author Response

Title: How to embrace sustainable performance via green learning orientation: A moderated mediating model (sustainability-1737506)

 

Dear reviewer,

Thank you for giving us an opportunity to revise and resubmit our study and also for your recognition of our efforts and encouragement. We much appreciate it! We believe that your guidance and comments helped us refine and improve our research study. Following your suggestions, we have revised our study. We believe that we have made our best efforts to provide the optimal solution to your concern and justification for our approach. Below, we include the points you made in italics and summarize the actions that we have taken to address them. (please note that the references mentioned here are included in the revised version of the manuscript)

 

1. Move the explanation for the choice of China as the research setting to the introduction.

Response: Thank you for your advice. We have moved the explanation for the choice of China to the Introduction as the research background.

“The rapid economic growth has given rise to a series of environmental problems, such as resource constraints, environmental pollution and carbon emissions. The “tragedy of the commons” caused pollution and resource depletion. With the rapid development of China’s economy, the environmental problem has become a crucial issue of great concern to the Chinese government. The Chinese government calls for green, eco-friendly, high-efficiency and sustainable development. To pursue dual carbon goals (carbon peaking and carbon neutrality) and promote the construction of ecological civilization and green development, China’s government has paid much attention to economic development and ecological sustainability. Manufacturing is pivotal for the rapid economic growth of China, which is also one of the biggest industries that cause resource consumption and environmental pollution. It is crucial to explore the sustainable development of Chinese manufacturing enterprises.” (see the first paragraph of Introduction section on page 1)

 

2. If your sampling is actually of convenient type, please acknowledge the associated limitation in the conclusion.

Response: Thank you for making this comment. To address your comment, we added this associated limitation in the 6. Limitations and Future Research section.

“Finally, given that the difficulty and high cost of data acquisition, we adopted the con-venient sampling method to acquire the data. However, the data acquired by this method was arbitrary and could not represent a clearly defined population, and the results should not be inferred from the population. Therefore, random sampling method should be used in the future studies to improve the representativeness of samples and strengthen the reliability of the conclusions.” (see the last point of 6. Limitations and Future Research section on page 15)

 

Again, thank you very much indeed for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. They have been particularly useful in further developing our study.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf