The Influence of Executives’ Education Background on Corporate Green Innovation: A Dual Perspective of Risk Bearing and Social Responsibility

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In the manuscript titled The Influence of Executives’ Education Background on Corporate Green Innovation: A Dual Perspective of Risk Bearing and Social Responsibility, The author demonstrated the pivotal role of executive education background in green technology innovation and green management innovation in the corporate.

Major comments:

1. In the Abstract section, it would benefit from a clearer statement of the research gap and its significance.

2. In section 2.2 and 2.3, it would be better if there is relevant literature available to demonstrate that executives' overseas study or work experience has a significant impact on both risk-bearing capabilities and the promotion of corporate social responsibility.

3. In the Management Recommendations section, recommendations on how to raise corporate social responsibility awareness and strengthen the company's risk-taking capabilities would be better.

4. The description of sample selection and data sources should be more detailed, explaining the representativeness of the samples and the reliability of the data.

Minor comments:

1. The grammatical structure is generally correct, but the current manuscript could benefit from further polishing to enhance clarity and flow.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic of the manuscript is relevant. Researchers and practitioners are interested in studying the factors influencing green innovation.  The manuscript is structured and contains the necessary sections. The relevance of the study is substantiated. References to sources correspond to the topic of the manuscript, but few new sources were used.

The empirical part is of scientific interest.

But to improve understanding of the content of the article, it needs to be improved. Explanations should be given:

1. It is necessary to conduct a more qualitative analysis of the literature. The research topic is very relevant, there are many modern studies. For example, "Senior management's academic experience and corporate green innovation" (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162521000962?via%3Dihub). However, the share of sources used that are no more than 5 years old is 19%). A good analysis of modern sources will improve the quality of research

2. The article does not disclose what is meant by green innovation. This is a broad concept, so its description is necessary.

3. Two indicators of green innovation are used: GTI and GMI. Why these indicators? Are they related? Why is GTI measured by the number of patents if the innovation involves their implementation? An explanation is needed

4. The authors include the level of education (education) and work experience abroad (abroad) as explanatory variables. Why is work experience abroad important? An explanation is needed.

5. It is recommended to make the conclusions more specific.

Answers to these questions will help improve the quality of the article and increase the interest of readers.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript has improved a lot compared to before, and I agree to its publication

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed all comments and made the necessary revisions to the manuscript. The quality of the literature review has been enhanced. The manuscript is relevant, logically organized, and presents significant scientific interest.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required