The Effect of Eco-Preneurship and Green Technology Management on Greenhouse Gas Discharge: An Analysis on East Asian Economies
, Md Billal Hossain 2, Maryam Khokhar 3,*, Mohamed Sharaf 4, Sarmad Ejaz 5, Faisal Ejaz 6 and Csaba Bálint Illés 7Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article should be improved in literature review-chapter 2. Only 6 positions were citated in this chapter. It is neccesarry to underline the purpose of the aricle and novelty of researches. Chaper 1 - introduction is too long in comaprsion to literature review.
Author Response
All comments are addressed in the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic is interesting, and the author has done a great job of realizing the subject. However, there are a few areas on the paper that is still lagging and should be adequately addressed.
Abstract
1. The authors should motivate the choice of variables with theory and empirical backing on the subject
2. Keywords should be revised to match the key elements of the title
3. Rewrite the title to be more catchy
4. Introduction
1. The objective of the paper presented need more clarifications to suit the reader to understand the main idea of the paper, especially for the study case is needed
2. Literature review
The literature is well written. However, there is a need for more recent studies ranging from 2018-2022 to motivate the study properly. The entire study is too scanty, and the related literature is not exhausted
Methodology
1. This section is generally well-motivated; kindly take note of the following minor additions
2. More benefits of the various techniques utilized should be stated
3. The authors should avoid many mathematical expressions or take some to the appendix and make the study reader friendly for other practitioners other than academics without compromising for study intent and quality.
Discussion
1. The discussion is well written, but the authors should like their findings to the previous studies in the literature.
2. There is a need for professional proofreading or consulting English native support
3. Conclusion
1. The sub-title should be the conclusion and policy recommendation but not only the conclusion
2. The policy, which is the engine of the study, is weak and small. I, therefore, encourage the authors to elaborate more on the policy recommendations to policymakers for the investigated bloc
3. The authors should add limitations of the study and future recommendation
Author Response
All comments are addressed in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In general, the entitled MS, “The Effect of Eco-preneurship and Green Technology Management on Greenhouse Gas Discharge: An Analysis on East Asian Economies” may be an interesting read and would support the green energy transition. However, in depth read of the MS shows that the MS needs a major critical revision of the MS for below comments to improve the technical integrity of the MS before re-consideration for this high reputed journal if revised well.
The abstract should be free from abbreviations. For instance the author should describe ARDL and NARDEL in abstract.
The author should avoid the use of third person through the MS. For instance, the author should avoid the use of I, We, Our, or US from MS. Kindly revise accordingly,
The research aim, gaps, and motivation should elaborate in abstract as well as in introduction well. Besides, the author should state the novelty of the research in introduction.
Green energy transition has been encouraged in recent years worldwide. India and China are highly populated and increasing growth rate. The author should encourage the comparative description of India as well.
What author mean by “…estimates of Green Technology are negative in both economies, yet also significant”.
Methodology should be described in detail with all the parameters, variable s considered with certain case studies.
Highlights are not appropriate for an article. For instance, “literature review”. Similarly, “results and analysis” or “results and findings”
The citations in the text are not cited as per the journal’s guidelines, For instance, [24] develop” it should mention the name like” “Zhang et al. [24]. Please look for certain published research articles for more information.
Figures and tables should be clear. The author should describe all the abbreviations in the footnote.
Results and discussion: In general, the overall result and discussion do not have proper information, discussion and lacks sufficient data to support the finding. Some of the comments are below.
The author has mentioned that “According to the research estimates, a 1% increase in the positive effect of Green Technology results in a 0.020% reduction in greenhouse gas discharges in China and a 0.012% reduction in Japan. In Japan, a 1% reduction in Green Technology increases greenhouse gas discharges by 0.008%. The author should mention the different parameters and variables selected for this study.
It is well reported tha inclusion of green technology may sufficiently contribute to reduce the green house gas emissions with economic promotion. However, the results reported by the author seem very preliminary. Please comment.
The author mentioned that “It shows that for every 1% 249 rise in Green Technology, Japan's greenhouse gas discharges decrease by 0.016% and 250 China's decreases by 0.135%” What is the source of the this study.
The conclusion should highlight the major key finding of the research in short summary.
Author Response
All comments are addressed in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
All though, the authors have revised the manuscript as per reviewers’ comments. The author should describe each changes made into manuscript in “response to reviewers” to avoid re-read of the entire MS again. The manuscript still needs a pert of revision to clarify below statements. Please revise and submit it for before acceptance.
1. The manuscript should be free from their personal such as I, We, you or us, ours. Please remove them.
2. Abstract is full of repetition of “eco-preneurship and green technology to improve the environ- 38 mental quality…”, please modify them in overall.
3. The author mentioned that “The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is one of several nations and economies that have been negatively impacted by greenhouse gas emissions and climate change over the past few years”. Please support with proper data resource.
4. Some sentence lacks proper information such as “. According to this, 75% of Pakistan has been impacted”.
5. The author has mentioned that “Green technologies are being used by businesses to decrease the waste 96 that harms the environment”. The author may describe with certain green research work like biofuels, bioenergy, wind energy etc. Below are certain citations for green research work for sustainable biofuels development. Please follow them.
6. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122000582
7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653520335232
8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852422014924
9. The author should mention “Such as, [21] studied” with “Such as Brown et al., [21]”. Accordingly revise [23] develop…., etc in the MS.
10. Green commodities, green design, green logistics management, and a green manufacturing process all contribute to a green ecosystem [31], resulting in greener firms and green entrepreneurship, according to their research [32]. Please provide detailed case study for this.
11. Table 1.1, what author mean by “Stheces” .
12. The following table (Table 1.1.) highlights the variables used for the models and their theses and descriptions: What author mean by “..their theses”…. Please correct it.
13. Figure 2 is not visible. Please use high clarity TIF files.
14. Conclusion, further recommendation and limitations should be clubbed together and should be short enough to describes the novelty of the research .
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
Hope you are doing well. I have addressed all the comments in the attached file. please check it. thank you for your precious time and valuable guides for improving my work.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have addressed all the comments suggested and the manuscript is now acceptable for publication with inclusion of below comments
The author has mentioned that “The studies cited fail to pro- 189 vide empirical evidence of a link between eco-preneurship or environmental entrepreneurship and green technology with greenhouse gas discharges [44]. Please justify it.
CO2 should be CO2
Conclusion has been revised as per comment.
Author Response
I have addressed all comments in the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
