The Impact of Dow Jones Sustainability Index, Exchange Rate and Consumer Sentiment Index on Carbon Emissions
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Very interesting manuscript. It raises a very important issue, which is Carbon Emissions. The abstract needs some fine-tuning. The authors should introduce the topic and emphasize its importance. Introduction. The authors start the manuscript in an interesting way, but there is no information about the novelty at work and what gap fills the material.The authors described in a very interesting way how the manuscript was divided. This adds value to the work. The methodology and results of the work were very nicely prepared and presented. The conclusion relates to work goals and results. The literature review is a weakness of the manuscript. I recommend extending the review considerably since the authors write that: "The objective of this study is to examine, over the last 20 years, the short-run and long-run effects of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions ..." I believe that the literature review should be more robust.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
After review of the manuscript “The impact of Dow Jones Sustainability Index, Exchange Rate and Consumer Sentiment Index on Carbon Emissions” I would like to congratulate you and your team for doing such good research work in your submitted paper for publication in this prestigious journal. The topic is very interesting and I liked the topic. I personally like to appreciate your efforts to present your research work in such a nice manner. But before your work will be recommended or will be given any possible acceptance few comments must be incorporated to improve the quality of your work as well as for further publication in this reputed journal. I have the following major observations or queries and comments which may further enhance your piece of work. The authors require to modify the following points in detail.
- In the abstract, there are multiple abbreviations without definition. Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) and Consumer Sentiment Index (CSI)
2. Overall, I recommend the inclusion of an acronyms table before the introduction section. In my opinion, there are a lot of acronyms, which could make it difficult for the readers to have them present along the paper. So, a table might help.
3. In the methodology section, equations are not numbered, and also they are outside of the framework. This issue should be fixed
- I strongly suggest the authors use a unit root test with a structural break because existing breaks in the dataset should be controlled by a dummy variable in the model if the break is significant in the dependent variable.
- In the tables, some of the font sizes are different, this issue must be fixed.
- Explanations in the Tables 6 and 7 must be revised. The authors should repeat what is written in the table. The findings should be explained in detail by comparing the existing theoretical and empirical findings.
- Add one more paragraph to the section of conclusions in order to explain the future scope of your research study as well as the limitation of the study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The current manuscript is written and presented with details in the research steps and results. Some minor points are required to improve or clarify.
1. There is no research hypothesis constructed and empirically tested in this paper. It will be more rigorous if research hypotheses are constructed from theories and/or existing literature.
2. Conclusion part seems too weak. As mentioned, research objectives clarified could help here with emphasizing most important implications and revealing the contribution of this research to the scientific knowledge.
3. Under table 7 please add to "Notes": Standard errors in ( ) & t-statistics in [ ]
4. Please argue, in detail,
- choosing the sustainability index (why didn't you choose another stock market index);
- the advantages of the methodology used in this research (in the methodology presentation section).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for making improvement. The manuscript looks very good now.
Author Response
Thank you, very much, for your approval.
Reviewer 2 Report
the revised manuscript can be accepted
Author Response
Thank you for your approval.
