Research on Supply Chain Emission Reduction Decisions Considering Loss Aversion under the Influence of a Lag Effect

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1) Please provide additional information about

- the database used in Chapter 5 (Numerical Study). Is it a free-access database?

- the limitations of the three models

2) The references must be improved to use more papers published in the last 5 years.

 

The paper is focusing on investigating the mediating effects of satisfaction with and trust in green brands

The topic is relevant in the field because it brings new knowledge on the brand's perceived quality and satisfaction.

The authors tested the correlation between green brand perceived quality on green brand satisfaction for a new research area, namely the participants of a road race in Taiwan.

a) the authors should provide additional information about the population size. Is the 2,500 runners the population size or not?
b) the authors should give more detail about the sample size of 500 participants. Is it statistically significant according to the population or has it been chosen based on another criterion? Why is the sample size 500 participants and not 600?
c) the authors should move the following sentence from Chapter 4 to Subchapter 3.1: “We distributed 500 questionnaires to the race participants, and 406 were returned. Of the 406 returned questionnaires, 352 were valid (86%).”

limitations of the study must be more detailed

a) For Figure 1, the “H1” and “H2” should be moved closely to the corresponding arrow
b) For Figure 2, the caption should be revised because the statistics must be placed as a note under the figure. I suggest:
Figure 2. Full model results
Note: χ²/df = 1.68, RMSEA = 0.44, CFI = 0.99, NFI = 0.98, GFI = 0.90

1) Please, revise the writing of:

- “Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd show”. The correct form is “Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd shows” (Line 33)

- “humans’ own cognitive”. The correct form is “humans’ cognitive” ((Line 36)

- “under the context”. The correct form is “under context” (Line 40)

- “emission reduction level”. The correct form is “emission reduction levels” (Line 56)

- “retailer-centred”. The correct form is “retailer-centered” (Line 59)

- “The aim of the study was”. The correct form is “The study aimed” ((Line 65)

- “aversion to study”. The correct form is “aversion to studying” (Line 80)

- “reduction investment tend to”. The correct form is “reduction investment tends to” (Line 93)

- “goodwill towards”. The correct form is “goodwill toward” (Line 136)

- “enhancing their own respective interests”. The correct form is “enhancing their respective interests” (Line 179)

- “maximize their own interests”. The correct form is “maximize their interests” (Line 187)

- “incur both original”. The correct form is “incur both the original” (Line 199)

- “dispersion decision are”. The correct form is “dispersion decision is” (Line 221)

- “for emission reducing”. The correct form is “for emission reduction” (Line 237)

- “in their own economic performance”. The correct form is “in their economic performance” (Line 238)

- “their own economic”. The correct form is “their economic” (Line 242)

- “return for investment”. The correct form is “return for the investment” (Line 250)

- “manufacturers’ own economic performance”. The correct form is “manufacturers’ economic performance” (Line 252)

- “a higher investment”. The correct form is “higher investment” (Line 253)

- “low carbon product”. The correct form is “low carbon products” (Line 297)

- “their own profits”. The correct form is “their profits” (Line 308)

- “of the increase of emission”. The correct form is “of the increase in emission” (Line 366)

- “centralised”. The correct form is “centralized” (Line 383). This applies only if you use the American English

- “be case with”. The correct form is “be the case with” (Line 396)

- “manufacturer's own interests”. The correct form is “manufacturer's interests” (Line 400)

- “manufacturer's own profit”. The correct form is “manufacturer's profit” (Line 435)

- “causing the lag time”. The correct form is “causing s lag time” (Line 444)

 

2) The citation of the references in the text must be placed between square brackets.

For instance, “R&D investment is often a long-term, continuous 30 process [1], and the effects of current R&D investment need to be demonstrated through a 31 certain lag time [2].” and not as simple values in the text, i.e.“R&D investment is often a long-term, continuous 30 process 1, and the effects of current R&D investment need to be demonstrated through a 31 certain lag time 2.”

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study presented in the article does not address an element of the two-tier supply chain, composed of manufacturers and retailers, related to the transport and transshipment of products in the logistics system. The transport item does not appear in the defined and relevant parameters for the model.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In this study, an autonomous emission reduction supply chain consisting of manufacturers and retailers, where manufacturers actively engage in carbon reduction activities problem was considered. To solve this problem differential game models are constructed under three scenarios: centralized decision making, rational preference decision making and loss-aversion preference decision making. I think that the suggested method contributes to the literature. But the study needs some revisions.

References should be shown appropriately within the article. Reference numbers should be in brackets. All equations should be numbered. (i.e., line 217 and 218 etc.). In view of that, this study needs some revisions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Paper Title:

Research on supply chain emission reduction decisions considering loss aversion under the influence of a lag effect.

Manuscript ID: sustainability-2550635

 

Broadly speaking, this paper considers an autonomous emission reduction supply chain consisting of manufacturers and retailers, where manufacturers actively engage in carbon reduction activities. Also, differential game models are constructed under three scenarios: centralized decision making, rational preference decision making and loss-aversion preference decision making. The optimal value of the manufacturer's investment in emission reduction and the size of the firm's profit in different models are compared, and the role of lag time and the manufacturer's loss aversion behaviour in influencing the firm's decision and profit is further analysed.

 

Significance:

 

-The scientific content of this paper is correct.

 

-The results could be better presented. This would emphasize the quality of the presented work.

 

-The limits of the paper are mentioned but some of the points should be investigated.

 

Quality of presentation:

Results – When a new evaluation framework is proposed, its result validation and comparisons of the results should be discussed. One can not leave it for future study as the results of the present study are not validated and compared. A sensitivity analysis and comparison are must to include.

 

Scientific soundness:

The subject addressed in this paper is relevant.

 

Interest to the readers:

 

In my opinion, the method of this paper seems to be interesting for the readership of the journal.

Quality of English Language - Good

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf