A Bibliometric Retrospection of CSR from the Lens of Finance and Economics: Towards Sustainable Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Author/s, 

I have appreciated your systematic work, but I have some suggestions to be followed to improve your paper and publish it in this Journal.

First, you must justify the choice to focus on the CSR research in Finance and Economics literature. Why? The explanation of the choice is lacking.

Secondly, you must justify the choice of Scopus database instead of other ones.

At page 2, line 91, you say "using a specific query". Which one? I cannot understand which are the queries and the keywords you have used. You perfectly described the process, but without indicating the words used to find the articles in the analysis.

At page 6, you indicated two a) in the Figure 3.

I cannot understand how you pass from section 3 to section 4. You analysed papers from 2000 to 2021 in section 3 and you propose in section 4 future research questions from articles published in 2021. I think there is some passages lacking.

Good luck with your paper.

 

Author Response

The authors are thankful to the editor and reviewer for their constructive comments on the paper entitled " A bibliometric retrospection of CSR from the lens of Finance and Economics: Towards Sustainable development” to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper that align with the reviewer's observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process. We express our sincere gratitude for their in-depth reviews, which have significantly helped improve the paper's quality.

 

Please find below our response to each of the comments in the order in which they have been raised. The changes are highlighted in yellow colour.

 

1. First, you must justify the choice to focus on the CSR research in Finance and Economics literature. Why? The explanation of the choice is lacking.

Response: Thanks for this relevant comment. Following your advice, we have added the following discussion in the introduction section.

 

The economic dimension involves firms’ financial stability to address their sustainable existence (Carroll, 2021; Carroll & Brown, 2018; Nurunnabi et al., 2020). Sustainability has become an utmost concern, and businesses seek ways and means to justify their CSR initiatives regarding sustainable finance and economic performance (Vărzaru et al., 2021).  From regulator to customer, the expectation of firm performing well in their CSR activities improves investor confidence and ensure better financial opportunities for firms, ultimately economic and environmental sustainability (Vărzaru et al., 2021). Therefore, CSR is researched widely from various economic and financial perspectives (Barauskaite & Streimikiene, 2021; Fernández-Gago et al., 2020). It is emphasized that the importance of Economic Dimension of CSR cannot be ignored while making firms accountable to the society and other stakeholders for sustainability (Carroll, 2021). Researchers found that firms’ financial performance, risk management, stakeholder value, ethical standing, and financial value are connected with the firm CSR strategy (Arora et al., 2021). However, there is a need to comprehend such diverse literature to understand the width and depth of the impact of CSR on different economic and financial perspectives. This will enable businesses and academicians to note future research areas for financially sustainable perspectives. (Line 31-47)

 

2. Secondly, you must justify the choice of Scopus database instead of other ones.

Response: Thanks for this useful insight. In introduction, we have added the explanation why we have selected Scopus database.

 

The superiority of the Scopus database is augmented by researchers over other databases in various fields (Gu et al., 2021; Lithin et al., 2021; Pranckutė, 2021). Pranckutė (2021) compared the two famous databases (i.e. WoS and Scopus), and found that Scopus has superiority to WoS due to its data extraction convenience, data coverage and availability of individual author profiles. This research also selected Scopus to extract data due to its wide coverage of data and journals. (Line 64-69)

 

3. At page 2, line 91, you say "using a specific query". Which one? I cannot understand which are the queries and the keywords you have used. You perfectly described the process, but without indicating the words used to find the articles in the analysis.

Response: Authors appreciate the reviewer concern about the query. In updated version we have added the Appendix I on specific query. Please see (Page 27-28).

 

4. At page 6, you indicated two a) in the Figure 3.

Response: Thanks for highlighting this typo. We have made the correction in figure three. In the updated version, figure 3 is on page 7.

 

5. I cannot understand how you pass from section 3 to section 4. You analysed papers from 2000 to 2021 in section 3 and you propose in section 4 future research questions from articles published in 2021. I think there is some passages lacking.

Response: Following this relevant comment, we have added connecting passage in the end of section 3.

 

Thus, it can be concluded that financial perspectives of CSR can be divided into four major themes: performance, investment, market settings and CSR strategy. Our analysis showed that the firm financial and market performances are significantly connected with different aspects of CST strategies. Similarly, the investment perspective explored corporate CSR investments and the investors’ behaviour towards such initiatives. The third literature perspective discussed CSR initiatives within different market settings such as competition and duopoly. At last, the fourth theme investigated CSR strategy and ethical decisions in financial decisions and social entrepreneurship. These themes portray the well-defined width and depth of CSR decisions from various economic and financial perspectives to answer the first two research questions of current research.

 

The two other research questions were to explore the future research agenda. Our analyses also showed the emerging CSR trends in Finance and Economics literature that can be viewed as future research agenda. It’s a matter of concern that the niche subthemes may indicate new and emerging topics for future research, yet the results are based on 21 years of data and may not indicate only recent research topics. Therefore, we also focus on additional qualitative content analysis to highlight future research agenda (Pranckutė, 2021). We defined a two-way method to propose recommendations and research questions for future studies as presented in the next section. (Line 505-521)

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper “A bibliometric retrospection of CSR from the lens of Finance 2 and Economics: Towards Sustainable development”  is well written in general, the research methodology and results were well presented but require extra support from relevant literature. In addition, there are essential weaknesses that need to be addressed.  

The introduction has to clearly identify, at least: the research gap, the research question, the methodology used, and the contribution of the paper.

For that reason, in the introduction author(s) need to provide a robust explanation of a) why there is a gap in theory and practice, b) what are the main research questions and why they are critical for theory and practice, c) how this paper will fill the gap in theory and practice, d) What unique knowledge do authors like to add to the existing literature, what innovations bring this manuscript to scientific studies? In addition, it should be mentioned whether or not similar reviews exist and what is new about this one.

It is recommended that the introduction be followed by a theoretical framework that contextualises the research. The proposal and methods are appropriate, however, the excess of information causes the results to be lost in the document. It is recommended to restructure this section and select the relevant data.  Moreover, figure 2 should be re-uploaded, the quality is not good. The word cloud is not in good resolution, it should be re-uploaded.

The graphs extracted from biblioshiny are not visible. The main results included in the document should be selected.

The results should be reconsidered. Selected information should be provided.

Future lines of research should be described in more depth. In addition, it is suggested that these authors also be mentioned in the theoretical framework.

Author Response

The authors are thankful to the editor and reviewer for their constructive comments on the paper entitled " A bibliometric retrospection of CSR from the lens of Finance and Economics: Towards Sustainable development” to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper that align with the reviewer's observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process. We express our sincere gratitude for their in-depth reviews, which have significantly helped improve the paper's quality.

Please find below our response to each of the comments in the order in which they have been raised. The changes are highlighted in yellow colour.

 

1. The introduction has to clearly identify, at least: the research gap, the research question, the methodology used, and the contribution of the paper. For that reason, in the introduction author(s) need to provide a robust explanation of a) why there is a gap in theory and practice, b) what are the main research questions and why they are critical for theory and practice, c) how this paper will fill the gap in theory and practice, d) What unique knowledge do authors like to add to the existing literature, what innovations bring this manuscript to scientific studies? In addition, it should be mentioned whether or not similar reviews exist and what is new about this one.

Response: Thanks for this relevant comment. In this updated version, we have addressed the raised concern and try to improve the general understanding of this research idea.

The contributions to this research are manifold and can be categorized as theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions. Theoretically the study contributes as being first of its kind bibliometric and meta-literature review of CSR being studied in Finance and Economics literature.  The CSR phenomenon is well established in business studies and is embedded broadly in the management literature (Frynas & Yamahaki, 2016). In a recent study, the researchers found that there is a dearth of bibliometric research in the context of individual subjects like CSR in management, finance, marketing, etc. (Ji, Tao, & Rim, 2021).

Methodologically this research contributes in three ways. Firstly, the research uses systematic procedure for keywords selection and processing. The keywords used in the query are extracted through expert opinion and through latest systematic literature reviews to present robust results. The keywords were being processed using AKA package in R which is a unique contribution of the study since most studies only use raw or limited keywords to perform bibliometric analysis. Secondly, important contribution of the study is that it provides cluster-wise bibliometric analysis whereas most bibliometric analysis only reveal overall results on one topic and do no relate to sub-topics or themes. Thirdly, the presentation of cluster-wise meta-literature review using content analysis, makes this research different among other bibliometric analysis.

As practical implication, the research proposed cluster-wise future research questions along with subjective author propositions that are helpful for academicians in their future research endeavours.  (Line 84-104)

 

 

2. It is recommended that the introduction be followed by a theoretical framework that contextualises the research. The proposal and methods are appropriate, however, the excess of information causes the results to be lost in the document. It is recommended to restructure this section and select the relevant data. 

Response: Thanks for this observation. Commonly, the bibliometric analysis does not have a specific theoretical frame work. But in this new version, we have clearly highlight the research process of this study. Further, following your comments, we have restructured the results section and divided it in four different clusters to enhance the overall understanding.  

 

3. Moreover, figure 2 should be re-uploaded, the quality is not good. The word cloud is not in good resolution, it should be re-uploaded.

Response: Following your comment, we have re upload the figure 2 with better resolution.

 

4. The graphs extracted from biblioshiny are not visible. The main results included in the document should be selected.

Response: Following your comment, we have re upload all the graphs with better resolution.

 

5. The resultsshould be reconsidered. Selected information should be provided.

Response: Thanks for this relevant comment. This time, we have provided the selected information.

Thus, it can be concluded that financial perspectives of CSR can be divided into four major themes: performance, investment, market settings and CSR strategy. Our analysis showed that the firm financial and market performances are significantly connected with different aspects of CST strategies. Similarly, the investment perspective explored corporate CSR investments and the investors’ behaviour towards such initiatives. The third literature perspective discussed CSR initiatives within different market settings such as competition and duopoly. At last, the fourth theme investigated CSR strategy and ethical decisions in financial decisions and social entrepreneurship. These themes portray the well-defined width and depth of CSR decisions from various economic and financial perspectives to answer the first two research questions of current research.

 

6. Future lines of researchshould be described in more depth. In addition, it is suggested that these authors also be mentioned in the theoretical framework.

Response: In this draft, we have added the future lines of research and also highlight the unexplored question in table one.

The two other research questions were to explore the future research agenda. Our analyses also showed the emerging CSR trends in Finance and Economics literature that can be viewed as future research agendas. It’s a matter of concern that the niche subthemes may indicate new and emerging topics for future research, yet the results are based on 21 years of data and may not indicate only recent research topics. Therefore, we also focus on additional qualitative content analysis to highlight future research agenda (Pranckutė, 2021). We defined a two-way method to propose recommendations and research questions for future studies as presented in the next section.

Reviewer 3 Report

This study used bibliometric coupling to part the research front of CSR and then studied each theme's conceptual structure and influential aspects separately. The authors carry out specific research and respect the structure of the scientific paper. The research can be published in its current form or with minor changes.

Author Response

The authors are thankful to the editor and reviewer for their constructive comments on the paper entitled " A bibliometric retrospection of CSR from the lens of Finance and Economics: Towards Sustainable development” to improve the quality of our manuscript. Thanks for your appreciation.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Accept.

The paper has been emproved following the suggestions provided in the previous review.

Author Response

Thanks for your positive feedback

Reviewer 2 Report

The research paper has potential, however, the way in which the results are presented is confusing. Figures 2 and 3 are not properly displayed due to the quality of the images. The other images and graphs used are not sufficiently commented on. Too many graphs have been used with no order of presentation of the findings. It is recommended to continue working on the idea and improving the document.

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

The authors are thankful to the editor and reviewer for their constructive comments on the paper entitled " A bibliometric retrospection of CSR from the lens of Finance and Economics: Towards Sustainable development” to improve the quality of our manuscript. We have reviewed the comments and generally agree with them. Accordingly, we have made changes in the paper that align with the reviewer's observations to the extent practicable. We take this opportunity to thank each of the individuals involved in the process. We express our sincere gratitude for their in-depth reviews, which have significantly helped improve the paper's quality.

 

Please find below our response to each of the comments in the order in which they have been raised. The changes are highlighted in yellow color.

 

1. The research paper has potential, however, the way in which the results are presented is confusing. Figures 2 and 3 are not properly displayed due to the quality of the images. The other images and graphs used are not sufficiently commented on.

Response: Thanks for this relevant comment. Following your advice, we have added the figures with high-quality resolution. Specially, we have updated figures 2 and 3. Please see Figures 2 and 3.

 

 

2. Too many graphs have been used with no order of presentation of the findings. It is recommended to continue working on the idea and improving the document.

Response: Thanks for this useful insight. In the revised version, we have improved the document and added an explanation at the start of each section. Hopefully, this time, we have improved the consistency of our results and discussion. Please see section 3 highlighted parts.