Blockchain-Enabled Supply Chain Internal and External Finance Model

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study examines a supply chain finance (SCF) system involving a manufacturer, capital-constrained retailer, consumer, and bank. It introduces a blockchain management business platform based on Stackelberg game theory and examines different financing scenarios. The findings show that adopting a blockchain platform can reduce interest rate thresholds, increase wholesale and retail prices, and improve order quantity and application degree. However, manufacturers and retailers expect greater profit growth when external bank financing is conducted through a blockchain platform. The optimal strategy for retailers and banks is to access the blockchain platform when the fee charged by the manufacturer is reasonable. The manufacturer's risk guarantee ratio plays a crucial role in regulating the choice of financing mode for retailers with debt default risks. The research topic is interesting and important for literature. However, the current version of the paper is not appropriate for publishing. The detailed comments are provided as follows:

1) In the abstract, it is stated that “It also introduces blockchain management business platform based on Stackelberg game theory.” However, there is no information regarding the “Stackelberg game theory”.  The information should be given in or before the Model Description Section.

2) The introductory section presents a suitable background of the research, but the aim and scope of the paper should be deeply emphasized. Also, the novelty of the paper should be highlighted;

3) The purpose of the Extended Model should be described clearly.

4) The section dedicated to empirical techniques is well-developed. Nevertheless, I suggest the author(s) focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the employed Blockchain methodologies. Also, the authors benefit from the distributed decision-making methods to enhance the theoretical background of the proposed methodologies such as : 1) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.06.027
2) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107644

 

5) What are the main practical or managerial implications of the study? Who will gain the maximum benefit from the paper?

Minor editing of the English language required by a professional proofreader.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors of this paper introduce a blockchain management business platform based on Stackelberg game theory. They analyze different scenarios and results appear quite interesting and promising. Overall, the paper appears quite well structured and written. However, I have some suggestions to improve its overall quality. They are listed below:

1. First of all, the abstract appears too long. I would suggest to make it more concise. Moreover, the research gap to be filled should be better explained. 

2. Introduction - lines 64-80: within this paragraph, I would suggest to highlight that blockchain is a successful technology in different fields such as healthcare [R1], agri-food [R2], energy [R3], supply chain management [R4] . This would increase the credibility related to the use of this technology and the completeness of the paper. The suggested references are reported below:

[R1]: Hasselgren et a. (2020). Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences—A scoping review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 134, 104040.

[R2] Mirabelli et al. (2021). Blockchain-based solutions for agri-food supply chains: A survey. International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling, 17(1), 1-15.

[R3] Wang et al. (2020). Integrating blockchain technology into the energy sector—from theory of blockchain to research and application of energy blockchain. Computer Science Review, 37, 100275.

[R4] Chang et al. (2020). When blockchain meets supply chain: A systematic literature review on current development and potential applications. Ieee Access, 8, 62478-62494.

3. In the literature review section, I would suggest to insert a table, where you compare your paper with the others existing in the scientific literature, which are similar in terms of methodology/topic. This would make your innovative contribution clearer.

4. Please, explain better the content of Figure 1. I would like to understand better all the blocks and connections. 

5. Are the equations in Section 4 novel or not? In case they are derived from the literature, please specify this by citing the adequate references.

English language is overall ok. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

It is a very interesting paper with very well-defined research questions and clear objectives.

The cited references concern recent publications that cover critical aspects of blockchain technologies and supply chain financial management.

Very well structured model proposed with clear assumptions and parameters’ description.

The data and results are interpreted and discussed appropriately and the conclusions are very important and consistent with the results. However, the conclusions do not address clearly the research questions put in the Introduction of the paper.  This can be improved. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

In the beginning, it should be emphasized that the subject matter of the reviewed journal is within the area of interest of the "Sustainability" journal. Using blockchain and Stackelberg's game theory, the authors correctly analyzed the supply chain financing (SCF) systems. However, before the possible publication of the article, it is necessary to make a few changes to the article. The most important issue seems to be the need to supplement the literature review with many fundamental items in the area that was analyzed, e.g. Sara Saberi, Mahtab Kouhizadeh, Joseph Sarkis & Lejia Shen: "Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management". Of course, this is just a single example, and there are more. The lack of a properly conducted literature analysis practically disqualifies each article. Another issue is the lack of information about who the analyzes are aimed at. If the analyzes are to be used by managers managing supply chains, please remember that they are people without specialist mathematical preparation, making decisions based on short, precise and synthetic information. According to the reviewer, the article should be supplemented with detailed guidelines on using the research results presented in the article.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Minor editing of English language required.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

We have proofread the entire paper and made edits to improve the English writing.

Reviewer 4 Report

Thank you very much for the serious approach of the authors to the submitted comments. I propose to accept the article as presented.

Author Response

Thank you for kind words.