Examining the Purchase Intentions of Indonesian Investors for Green Sukuk

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

From my point of view, I would recommend writing more about how research can fill the gap in the literature. Better add chapter on literature review. I recommend that authors discuss the literature review in a pro-con approach, highlighting the benefits of different approaches in the field while discussing the limitations of the research.

I would develop the implications for theory, practice and policy makers in one chapter. The text is understandable and clear, but I would recommend reviewing the English language more. The article would benefit from clearer presentation of how and which theories enrich the paper. The discussion needs to be improved and the conclusions need to be improved too. Check that all tables and graphs have sources and include the most recent ones in the bibliography. I appreciate the effort of the authors and hope they will find these comments helpful in improving their research article in the future.

Best regards

Author Response

Please find the revision manuscript based on the above suggestions.

Kind regards, 

team writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments to Authors

I believe this research paper is an innovative study examining the Purchase Intentions of Indonesian Investors for Green Sukuk. The topic is contemporary and exciting, and I observed that the paper provides a quantitative example of the impact of functional, social, emotional, religious, and knowledge on customers' intentions to purchase green finance products. The topic certainly fits the issues in the Sustainability journal’s scope to a reasonable extent, while the methodology section shows good conceptual integration. Further, I observed that the paper is correctly structured with a fine logical flow. Overall, this is pleasant reading, and I recommend this research paper for publication with minor corrections.

To ensure that the paper suits journal guidelines, I wish to offer a few suggestions to the author(s):

1. Introduction: Please further discuss how the impact of Purchase Intentions of Indonesian Investors for Green Sukuk can contribute to Sustainable Development Goals empirically and theoretically. In the introduction section, it is required to clearly mention the research objectives and provide an overview of the manuscript structure.
2. Model development: Under the research model, the author writes functional value, social value, emotional value, religious value, and knowledge value are independent variables. However, in Table 2, the knowledge value variable is written as just knowledge. Please maintain consistency throughout the paper. Similarly, please try to consistently maintain the variables' order throughout the paper to enhance the manuscript's readability. Hypothesis 3 should be corrected (Line 138).
3. Discussion: The discussion section could be further enhanced with a discussion of the socio-economic context of the country. You may further enhance the discussion section with a description of more specific policy implications of the results, limitations of the study, and future research directions.
4. Finally, the author(s) are encouraged to correct any academic writing mistakes, in-text citations, and references in the paper. Proofreading is necessary.

I hope the author(s) will address these issues and provide a better scientific contribution to the development literature.

All the best…

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Please find the revision manuscript based on the reviewer's suggestions.

Kind regards, 

Team writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

A very good paper. Please refer to the annotations for clarity and visibility. Added a functional equation form to Cronbach’s alpha.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please find the revision manuscript based on the reviewer's suggestions.

Kind regards, 

Team writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This paper examines the impact of functional, social, emotional, religious, and knowledge values on the choice to purchase green finance products in Indonesia. The topic is quite interesting and manuscript is in overall well written, but the methodology, although adequate, requires several clarifications. Please, see my comments below.

The term 'Sukuk' is never defined. Please define it or replace it with a general term (e.g., green finance?). Note that, if such term appears in the title, it should be defined in the abstract.

In section 4.2, it is important to provide a list of the items with a description. Please add. Also, provide more information on how the questionnaries were administered.

Line 193-196: sample size requirements for PLS-SEM cannot be discussed here, because the method is introduced for the first time in section 4.3. Please, move this sentence in section 4.3, and, more important, add details on the criteria used to establish the required sample size.

Section 4.3: the use of PLS-SEM to test the research hypothesis in this study should be justified. Please add some convincing motivations. You can refer to Hair et al. (2017) (citation 72) and to the following article:

Hair Jr, J.F., Matthews, L., Matthews, R., Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2): 107. DOI:10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624

Line 203-204: this sentence sounds uncorrect: "The bootstrap method was employed with 300 samples based on the path loading significance test.". I suggest: "The bootstrap method with 300 resamples was employed to assess the significance of path coefficients.".

Table 2: I would add the Cronbach's alpha index to assess internal consistency.

Table 3: It is not clear what numbers in the table represent. Please, add a precise explanation in the caption.

Figure 1: the term ‘path analysis’ in the caption seems a bit improper. I suggest to change into: "Results of the structural model", or something similar. In this figure, I would also add the t-statistics within brackets. The t-statistics are currently shown in a separate figure (figure 2), which appears redundant, thus adding them to figure 1 provides the opportunity to remove figure 2.

Table 4: I would replace the column label 'Beta' with 'Estimate'. Also note that the acronym SE (standard error of the estimate) is undefined.

Line 272: instead of "predictor adequacy", it would be more correct to say "predictive adequacy".

Lines 234 and 257: instead of "reference variable", it would be clearer to say "dependent variable".

Author Response

Please find the revision manuscript based on the reviewer's suggestions.

Kind regards, 

Team writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

The submitted paper is devoted to a very interesting and useful topic, mapping the purchase intentions of indonesian Investors for 2 Green Sukuk, supported by empirical study to support the set hypothesis. Using analysis to estimate the model and the attributes.
The study has its strengths as it provides detailed information on the factors affecting. Another strength is the statistical background of the paper. Moreover, I do like the consideration of meeting conditions for provided analysis.
As this topic is really important to be analysed in other countries, I would recommend rewriting the methodological section and identifying methodological steps that could help other researchers replicate the research in different conditions.
I have several points which should be addressed before publishing:
1. Please, revise the references used in the paper. Some cited sources are extremely old (however relevant). But to declare the importance and topicality, the references such be mainly since 2015. I strongly recommend to rewrite the literature part of the paper and to add more Q1 and Q2 journal papers. I recommend to add also these papers:
Valaskova, K., Kliestik, T., & Gajdosikova, D. (2021). Distinctive determinants of financial indebtedness: evidence from Slovak and Czech enterprises. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 16(3), 639–659. https://doi.org/10.24136/eq.2021.023
Durana, P., Perkins, N., & Valaskova, K. (2021). Artificial Intelligence Data-driven Internet of Things Systems, Real-Time Advanced Analytics, and Cyber-Physical Production Networks in Sustainable Smart Manufacturing. Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, 16(1), 20–30.
Valaskova, K., Adamko, P., Frajtova Michalikova, K., & Macek, J. (2021). Quo Vadis, earnings management? Analysis of manipulation determinants in Central European environment. Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(3), 631–669.
Durana, P., Michalkova, L., Privara, A., Marousek, J., & Tumpach. M. (2021). Does the life cycle affect earnings management and bankruptcy? Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(2), 425–461.
2. Add information about situation in other countries and possibilities to replicate the study.
3. Provide limitations and future directions of the research 

Author Response

Please find the revision manuscript based on the reviewer's suggestions.

Kind regards, 

Team writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

The Authors have partially addressed my concerns in the previous review. My new review was pretty difficult because they did not provide point-point answers. Anyway, the manuscript has substantially improved and I was able to list all the (minor) issues left. If these will be addressed seriously, I think that the manuscript reaches a sufficient quality for publication.

Line 212: I suggest to state that the items are listed in Table 2.

Section 4.3: the motivation for the use of PLS-SEM compared to other SEM typologies (e.g., CB-SEM) is still missing. Please, make reference to refs 89 and 90, and add a convincing motivation. If you need further clarification on this issue, see the following note in the SmartPLS manual:
https://www.smartpls.com/documentation/choosing-pls-sem/pls-sem-compared-with-cbsem/

Line 257: I do not find anything about what the Authors call 'procedure approach'. Please clarify what is this.

Table 3: what are these numbers? This should be clarified in the manuscript when the table is referenced, and in the caption of the table.

Figure 1: for completeness, I would add the t-statistics or the p-values next to each estimated path coefficient, so that statistical significance are promptly deduced.

Author Response

Please attached the revision as suggested.

Kind regards, 

Writers 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf