Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors of the paper "Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators", present a relevant topic following the current global context of crises, of the European Green Agreement with a direct impact on green energy, and the analysis carried out by the authors "the impact of the financial risk on the sustainability of the environment in Poland", creates a multiplier effect at the level of other countries both at the European and global level.

The concepts, bibliographic sources are current, the citations are properly mentioned within the work, for example the work of the authors (Wang et al., 2023) "the rate of environmental pollution along the road to economic growth is a financial risk", or the work of Zhao et al. al. (2021)" established that financial risk mitigation helps to control CO2 emissions in OECD member economies".

The research methodology is adequate and is based on empirical data "taking under control the role of economic growth, primary energy consumption and new energy consumption between 1990Q1 and 2019Q4", with the direct orientation of the analysis so as to "detect the effect of financial risk on the degradation environment in Poland", as described in table 3.

The results are presented accordingly, the authors based on the research methodology present "directional causality analysis using the Fourier causality test Toda Yamamoto showed that financial risk and renewable energy consumption at that time had a unidirectional causal influence on LCO2 with any withdrawal action in Poland ". We all suggest the authors of the work to highlight their personal scientific contributions to the specialized scientific literature, especially since the work clearly presents the pragmatic applicative utility both at the economic and governmental level.

The conclusions are adequately presented by the authors of the paper, with the authors highlighting the limitations of the study as well as concerns for future research with expansion to other economies and regions, which clearly shows the research team's pursuit of work with multiplier effects.

We congratulate the research team for the topic of the work, as well as for the results obtained, we suggest completing the above-mentioned elements, and after these additions, we propose the work for acceptance.

Author Response

Dear Chief Editor”

Thanks for considering for reviewl our paper, “Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators”.  We have received reviewer comments and below are our responses

The authors of the paper "Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators", present a relevant topic following the current global context of crises, of the European Green Agreement with a direct impact on green energy, and the analysis carried out by the authors "the impact of the financial risk on the sustainability of the environment in Poland", creates a multiplier effect at the level of other countries both at the European and global level.

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The research team remains grateful to you.

The concepts, bibliographic sources are current, the citations are properly mentioned within the work, for example the work of the authors (Wang et al., 2023) "the rate of environmental pollution along the road to economic growth is a financial risk", or the work of Zhao et al. al. (2021)" established that financial risk mitigation helps to control CO2 emissions in OECD member economies".

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The research team remains grateful to you.

The research methodology is adequate and is based on empirical data "taking under control the role of economic growth, primary energy consumption and new energy consumption between 1990Q1 and 2019Q4", with the direct orientation of the analysis so as to "detect the effect of financial risk on the degradation environment in Poland", as described in table 3.

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The research team remains grateful to you.

The results are presented accordingly, the authors based on the research methodology present "directional causality analysis using the Fourier causality test Toda Yamamoto showed that financial risk and renewable energy consumption at that time had a unidirectional causal influence on LCO2 with any withdrawal action in Poland ". We all suggest the authors of the work to highlight their personal scientific contributions to the specialized scientific literature, especially since the work clearly presents the pragmatic applicative utility both at the economic and governmental level.

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The section has been reviewed to reflect your concerns.

The conclusions are adequately presented by the authors of the paper, with the authors highlighting the limitations of the study as well as concerns for future research with expansion to other economies and regions, which clearly shows the research team's pursuit of work with multiplier effects.

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The research team remains grateful to you.

We congratulate the research team for the topic of the work, as well as for the results obtained, we suggest completing the above-mentioned elements, and after these additions, we propose the work for acceptance.

Answer: Thanks for your observations and comments. The research team remains grateful to you.

 

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Data updates as estimates at least are needed. ‘Experts define financial risk to refer to the probability of losing financially on investment.’ – some sources are needed. Replace it/they with the proper words to avoid confusion. ‘It also refers to the corporations' inability to manage and fulfill’, ‘It can equally happen indirectly’. Etc. Check for no or extra spaces throughout the manuscript. E.g., ‘The 2019 climate report’, ‘energy use, Koch (1992) found’. Etc. ‘Studies have found cases of natural disaster losses’ – but only one source is cited. Figures should be improved and thoroughly explained. Remove unnecessary text such as ‘A recent study by’. ‘Quality of life in Poland appears to rise in tandem’ – in tandem with what? Research questions and hypotheses must be constructed based on more specific supporting sources, preferably as recent as possible. ‘It is immensely found’ – immensely? ‘A study by Hooi and Smyth in five ASEAN economies’ – year is missing. A lot of sentences are poorly edited. E.g., ‘renewable energy use (Apergis et al., 2010; Sebri and Ben-Salha, 2014), Other studies’, ‘Another comparative study on wood, concrete, and steel utility poles. Indicated that wood poles’, ‘Given this comprehensive review. The effect of financial risk’. ‘According to Lewis (2013), economic growth refers to an increase in an economy's production and consumption of both economic products and services (Jones, 2022).’ – who says what? ‘Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a’ – what is the point of writing the full phrase + the acronym so late in the manuscript? ‘Experts define financial risk to refer to the probability of financial loss.’ – what specific experts? ‘This has been found to have profound environmental consequences.’ – by whom? Too much general content. E.g., ‘All economies in the world strive for economic growth. But the expansion has a significant negative impact on the ability of humans to live.’ ‘The United Nations and nations’ - ? More development and depth of the methodology and analysis are needed. The discussions require more structure and there is a need of offering a clear assessment of reviewed literature. ‘Covid-19’ – ‘COVID-19’. Conclusion needs to be rewritten so that important results are brought out along with their interpretation, comparison with earlier studies, and implications in a more integrated fashion. The reference list is poorly edited, with a lot of incomplete sources.
The relationship between financial development and economic growth as regards the impact of financial risk on environmental sustainability has not been covered, and thus such sources can be cited:
Kliestik, T., Valaskova, K., Lăzăroiu, G., Kovacova, M., and Vrbka, J. (2020). “Remaining Financially Healthy and Competitive: The Role of Financial Predictors,” Journal of Competitiveness 12(1): 74–92. doi: 10.7441/joc.2020.01.05.
Pocol, C. B., Stanca, L., Dabija, D.-C., Pop, I. D., and Mișcoiu, S. (2022). “Knowledge Co-creation and Sustainable Education in the Labor Market-Driven University–Business Environment,” Frontiers in Environmental Science 10: 781075. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.781075.
Lăzăroiu, G., Ionescu, L., Andronie, M., and Dijmărescu, I. (2020). “Sustainability Management and Performance in the Urban Corporate Economy: A Systematic Literature Review,” Sustainability 12(18): 7705. doi: 10.3390/su12187705.

Author Response

Dear Chief Editor”

Thanks for considering for reviewl our paper, “Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators”.  We have received reviewer comments and below are our responses

Data updates as estimates at least are needed. ‘Experts define financial risk to refer to the probability of losing financially on investment.’ – some sources are needed. Replace it/they with the proper words to avoid confusion. ‘It also refers to the corporations' inability to manage and fulfill’, ‘It can equally happen indirectly’. Etc.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns (lines 65-67)

Check for no or extra spaces throughout the manuscript. E.g., ‘The 2019 climate report’, ‘energy use, Koch (1992) found’. Etc. ‘

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns eg. line 69-73

Studies have found cases of natural disaster losses’ – but only one source is cited. Figures should be improved and thoroughly explained.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns eg. line 61-62

Remove unnecessary text such as ‘A recent study by’. ‘Quality of life in Poland appears to rise in tandem’ – in tandem with what? Research questions and hypotheses must be constructed based on more specific supporting sources, preferably as recent as possible. ‘It is immensely found’ – immensely? ‘A study by Hooi and Smyth in five ASEAN economies’ – year is missing.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns

 A lot of sentences are poorly edited. E.g., ‘renewable energy use (Apergis et al., 2010; Sebri and Ben-Salha, 2014),

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns throughout the paper

Other studies’, ‘Another comparative study on wood, concrete, and steel utility poles. Indicated that  wood poles’, ‘Given this comprehensive review. The effect of financial risk’. ‘According to Lewis (2013), economic growth refers to an increase in an economy's production and consumption of both economic products and services (Jones, 2022).’ – who says what? ‘Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a’ – what is the point of writing the full phrase + the acronym so late in the manuscript? ‘

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed and mistakes corrected.

Experts define financial risk to refer to the probability of financial loss.’ – what specific experts? ‘This has been found to have profound environmental consequences.’ – by whom? Too much general content. E.g., ‘All economies in the world strive for economic growth. But the expansion has a significant negative impact on the ability of humans to live.’ ‘The United Nations and nations’ - ? More development and depth of the methodology and analysis are needed.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns throughout the paper

The discussions require more structure and there is a need of offering a clear assessment of reviewed literature. ‘Covid-19’ – ‘COVID-19’. Conclusion needs to be rewritten so that important results are brought out along with their interpretation, comparison with earlier studies, and implications in a more integrated fashion.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The relevant sentences have been reviewed to reflect your concerns throughout the paper

 

The reference list is poorly edited, with a lot of incomplete sources.
The relationship between financial development and economic growth as regards the impact of financial risk on environmental sustainability has not been covered, and thus such sources can be cited:
Kliestik, T., Valaskova, K., Lăzăroiu, G., Kovacova, M., and Vrbka, J. (2020). “Remaining Financially Healthy and Competitive: The Role of Financial Predictors,” Journal of Competitiveness 12(1): 74–92. doi:10.7441/joc.2020.01.05; Pocol, C. B., Stanca, L., Dabija, D.-C., Pop, I. D., and Mișcoiu, S. (2022). “Knowledge Co-creation and Sustainable Education in the Labor Market-Driven University–Business Environment,” Frontiers in Environmental Science 10: 781075. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.781075.
Lăzăroiu, G., Ionescu, L., Andronie, M., and Dijmărescu, I. (2020). “Sustainability Management and Performance in the Urban Corporate Economy: A Systematic Literature Review,” Sustainability 12(18): 7705. doi: 10.3390/su12187705.

Answer: Thanks for your observations. The paper has been reviewed to incorporate your suggested papers.

Reviewer 3 Report

In my opinion the text is important, covering the relationship between financial risk and sustainability, analyzed in a case of Poland. General design of the study, hypotheses development, statistical methods (Fourier-based Estimators) are on a good level. So the scientific workshop is ok for me in most cases. However, I would like tu underline some clear malfunctions, which in my opinion should be eliminated. They encpompass the simply wrong structure of the paper, i.e.:

1) Introduction is very long. It is not practiced that introduction includes figures, graphs, etc. Typically, introduction takes 1-2 pages and includes the proof that the range of the topic is important, up-to-date etc. I think much of the content of introduction should be moved to another, added point of structure.

2) The chapter "Methodology" is very long. What is more, it contains also the results of calculations and their discussion (!). You should include only the descriprion of the methods in "Methodology" and then add points "Analysis of the results", "Discussion" and move the proper content to these points.

3) Conclusion and pratcical implications are very general. Please point out, what are the conclusions (separately) and policy implications (separately).

4) Why are the figures so big? How will they fit the final, formatted version?

5) In many places I've found editorial shortcomings, e.g. double dots (..), different fonts, errors in journal names (Applied energy - all words should begin wityh capitals), redundant underlines - mainly in references. Please correct the whole paper very casrefully from the editorial point.

Author Response

Dear Chief Editor”

Thanks for considering for our paper, “Financial Risk and Environmental Sustainability in Poland: Evidence from Novel Fourier-Based Estimators”.  We have received reviewer comments and below are our responses

In my opinion the text is important, covering the relationship between financial risk and sustainability, analyzed in a case of Poland. General design of the study, hypotheses development, statistical methods (Fourier-based Estimators) are on a good level. So the scientific workshop is ok for me in most cases.

Thanks for your observations and comments.

However, I would like to underline some clear malfunctions, which in my opinion should be eliminated. They encpompass the simply wrong structure of the paper, i.e.:

1) Introduction is very long. It is not practiced that introduction includes figures, graphs, etc. Typically, introduction takes 1-2 pages and includes the proof that the range of the topic is important, up-to-date etc. I think much of the content of introduction should be moved to another, added point of structure.

Thanks for your observations. The introduction has been reviewed to reflect your concerns.

2) The chapter "Methodology" is very long. What is more, it contains also the results of calculations and their discussion (!). You should include only the descriprion of the methods in "Methodology" and then add points "Analysis of the results", "Discussion" and move the proper content to these points.

Thanks for your observations. The methodology has been reviewed to reflect your concerns

3) Conclusion and pratcical implications are very general. Please point out, what are the conclusions (separately) and policy implications (separately).

Thanks for your observations. The conclusion has been reviewed.

4) Why are the figures so big? How will they fit the final, formatted version?

Thanks for your observations. The figures have been reviewed to reflect your concerns

5) In many places I've found editorial shortcomings, e.g. double dots (..), different fonts, errors in journal names (Applied energy - all words should begin wityh capitals), redundant underlines - mainly in references. Please correct the whole paper very casrefully from the editorial point.

Thanks for your observations. The paper has been reviewed to correct all errors and typos.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Some table headers are unclear.

Author Response

Thanks a lot for this comment. We fixed the headings of tables and figures