The Impact of ESG on Brand Trust and Word of Mouth in Food and Beverage Companies: Focusing on Jeju Island Tourists

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Many companies in most industries try to focus on ESG. In this vein, this research seems timely and valued. To help improving this study, I would give some comments about this paper.

The introduction accounts for interest in ESG in Korean companies in commodity market. In addition to them, the authors need to explain about F&B companies (in Korea and specifically in Jeju) which are regarding the topic of this study. It could also help increase justification of this study. Furthermore, it would be better for this section to provide how the result of this study could contribute to related industry.

According to the result, H3-1 and H3-2 were not supported. The author should explain the result of these hypotheses. In the implication section, the authors could provide responses of some questions as follow: Why do you think there were not supported? What do you think these results could imply in this industry?

Comparably, implication section seems weak, so please add some more critical comments developed by discussion.

Finally, please try to check references and typos by reviewing this research paper thoroughly.

Author Response

Thank you for all your meaningful comments.

We revised our manuscipt based on your suggestions.

Please find the attachment.

Thank you, again.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper adequately deals with the topic. The sample size is adequate. The methods are also appropriate.

Author Response

Thank you for all your comments and support.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper is quite well developed, but some changes and improvements are necessary. 

Introduction
This section must detail and explain the:
- how the research question is implemented in the paper
- how the paper adds value to any theory or approach
- how the paper is novel - original and the research context is unique
- the last paragraph should contain a brief description of the papers next sections.

Literature Review: An update of references is necessary.

The relationship between customer-based brand equity and sustainable purchase intentions as regards ESG management attributes of food and beverage companies has not been covered, and thus such sources can be cited:

Majerova, J., Sroka, W., Krizanova, A., Gajanova, L., Lăzăroiu, G., and Nadanyiova, M. (2020). “Sustainable Brand Management of Alimentary Goods,” Sustainability 12(2): 556. doi: 10.3390/su12020556.

Smith, A., and Machova, V. (2021). “Consumer Tastes, Sentiments, Attitudes, and Behaviors Related to COVID-19,” Analysis and Metaphysics 20: 145–158. doi: 10.22381/am20202110.

Lăzăroiu, G., Neguriţă, O., Grecu, I., Grecu, G., and Mitran, P. C. (2020). “Consumers’ Decision-Making Process on Social Commerce Platforms: Online Trust, Perceived Risk, and Purchase Intentions,” Frontiers in Psychology 11: 890. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00890.

Figure 1: I do not see the hypothesis in this figure. Authors should also pinpoint on the arrows which hypothesis is which. Please be very explicit.

Fig 1 depicts 7 arrows, so there should be 7 hypothesis. I did not find 7 hypothesis in the manuscript

 

Methodology

for table 2: please provide the references from which you took the scales / constructs.

Table 4: now here you have 7 hypothesis, but the numbering of these hypothesis does not correspond to the numbering from the literature review. Please restructure the numbering of hypothesis in the lit review. Please also mark all hypothesis numbers on fig 1

Discussions and conclusions should be 2 distinct sections
Discussions: authors should compare own results with previous findings from the literature to pinpoint the novelty of their paper. Up to date references must be cited

Conclusions: a. theoretical implications; b. managerial contributions; c. limitations and future research perspectives. No references should be cited here.

References are not formatted according to MDPI guidelines. 

 

In the methodology section, please also explain the research context and the relevance of the research context as an international benchmark.  

Author Response

Thank you for all your meaningful comments.

We revised our manuscript based on your suggestions.

Please find the attachment.

Thank you so much, again.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors managed to improve most of my suggestions and recommendations. Therefore I consider that the paper is now sound and can be accepted. Congratulations. Best luck in attracting relevant citations.