Development of the Financial Flow Model for the Sustainable Development of an Industrial Enterprise

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Development the financial flow model for the sustainable development of an industrial enterprise

The theme of the paper is interesting and topical in relation to the challenges of sustainable development of economic systems and therefore companies. But the methodology developed in this study seems limited to meet the challenge of providing insights at this level. Some passages need to be rewritten and/or developed.

Below are several specific remarks:

Title: “of” is missing?

Abstract: the abstract is not clear or sufficiently explicit and would deserve a thorough re-reading (missing words). The abstract does not mention that the study is placed in the context of the Russian industry.

More generally, a re-reading of the paper is necessary to complete the missing parts of the sentences (and remove excess space).

L32: the ESG acronym must be indicated

L60: “Gross fixed capital accumulation”: do the authors mean “Gross fixed capital formation”?

L64-66: “Summarizing the highlighted emphases, we formulated the goal and objectives of the study. The goal is to develop a model of financial flow management for sustainable development of an industrial enterprise”: the SDGs are mentioned above and here, the objective of achieving a sustainable development of the company, but how do the authors make the link between the two? What criteria have they determined for the company's development to be said to meet the SDGs? They only cite the GFCF.

L74-78: The reliability of the presented research is due to the study of an extensive array of scientific papers devoted to the study of the problems of sustainable development of industrial enterprises and the financial flows management as a part of achieving sustainable development goals; processing of a reliable array of data on the activities of an industrial enterprise, placed in an open source: this literature review is not presented in the paper except for some articles cited but not developed for what they bring to this study

L82-84: “The basic provisions of the concept in a number of works of scientists from different countries (…) is covered…”: that is to say? Can the authors elaborate?

L92-93: “Of course, the methodological aspects of sustainable development are also widely represented in the world scientific literature…”: a list of indicators (not necessarily specific to sustainable development and SDGs) is then given without specifying what they contribute methodologically to the determination of the concept of sustainable development. Similarly, several elements are cited in a very vague manner, as: “other scientists’ approaches” (L102), “3 classic elements” (L107), “an extensive set of key performance indicators presented in the context of three factors of sustainable industrial development” (L114), etc. SAM4SIP (L108), specify the acronym: Self-Assessment Method of Capabilities for Sustainability in the Product innovation process, “six relevant domains” (L123), which ones?

How do the authors position themselves or their study, their methodology in relation to all this?

L125-126: “As rightly noted (Andriuškevičius et al. 2022), studies on the assessment of sustainable development through the prism of energy are superior to other aspects.”: that is? superior in what way?

L126-131: “At the same time, we consider it is important to clarify that there is also an emphasis on environmental issues of sustainable development economic systems of different levels, which acts as a limitation, since sustainable development is not a significant prevalence of environmental issues, but rather the balanced development of all three components - economic, environmental and social.”: a limitation?

“sustainable development is… rather the balanced development of all three components - economic, environmental and social.”: have the authors explored the literature dealing with sustainable development under the prism of this triple component? the literature is also rich

L132-133: “Since the subject of this study is financial flows, as a part of analytical review, we studied the scientific works devoted to investment issues in the framework of sustainable development.”: to do this, the literature cited is not numerous. What was the methodology used to determine the relevant articles for this review? to draw these conclusions… Ex: “the third area of research is investments in renewables energy sources (L137): for whom? in what context? there is no mention of any work or approach to shifting finance towards the SDGs.

L159 “Our study at filling these methodological gaps aimed.”: all those mentioned above?

L165: data cover the (-year period 2016-2020: what impact has the covid crisis had on the company's activities and therefore on its results and analysis?

L185: ISDI : specify Integrated Sustainable Development Index and “proposed earlier”: where? Why this indicator among all the others more or less mentioned? (+ replace the brackets)

L188: Can the authors justify the use of the geometric mean?

L191-197: Can the authors justify the choice or limitation of these variables? Wouldn't other variables have been more relevant given the purpose of the study?

What about the selection of alternative materials that respond more to the challenges of the SDGs in the case of environmental factors to consider the sustainable development of the company and the limitation of its impact? investment choices, such as investments in energy efficiency, limitation of consumption?

L198: “The higher the value of each three factors, the more sustainable development demonstrated by the industrial system.”: the conclusion appears precipitous...

These indicators provide elements on these social, economic and environmental aspects but do not appear sufficient to determine the sustainable development of the company and even less of the industry. Can the authors justify and argue how they could be?

L207-222: the method of calculating weights appears limited. In addition, it is based on the country's place in the SDG results and not on the company itself, including its sector, its activity, etc., and therefore the issues and impacts that may differ from it.

L230-233: why here, in relation to what is developed above, a focus on environmental variables?

L23-234: Can the authors justify this approach?

L237-239: how do the authors determine where these flows are directed or prioritized? and thus be relevant for positioning the company's sustainable development?

L242-245: the authors do not explain the method used. what are the constraints? considering that the variables are those mentioned above (?)

L259-261: “The decrease in the energy efficiency indicator also confirmed by the assessment of the company's readiness for the energy transition”: where the EE indicator is produced?

L271-272 “positive dynamics observed in the reduction 271 of emissions of harmful substances into the atmosphere, the reduction of the indicator by the end of 2020 amounted to 2.77 thousand tons”: Do we really see a positive dynamic?

L279-281: “staff turnover. The importance of the latter is due to the satisfaction / dissatisfaction of the personnel with working conditions, which, in turn, is a consequence of the implemented social policy at the enterprise”: How can the authors say this? This ratio can hide very different realities. Between voluntary departures and those caused by the employer (dismissals), the conclusions to be drawn are quite different.

L294297: “Thus, it is necessary to summarize the unbalanced development of enterprise sustainable development components - economic, environmental and social. Despite the large investments of the enterprise in fixed assets, sustainable development potential of PJSC «Nizhnekamskneftekhim» has not revealed yet.”: Couldn't this be due to a wrong choice of indicators or their calculation? or to incompleteness?

L310-313: the conclusion on disharmonization deserves to be further discussed.

L389: “Relying on values of past periods, the value equal to 1.5 is set as target level of SDIE (1) indicator.” Can the authors elaborate?

L391-396: How can the authors conclude that?

L404: the authors should further explore the issue of coverage of economic, environmental and social factors in their study

L423: “In our view, the second viewpoint contradicts the concept of sustainable balanced development.”- the authors should develop this

The study focuses on the enterprise PJSC "Nizhnekamskneftekhim, how is the replicability (or universalization) as announced by the authors?

L436: energy and material costs?

L449: the authors state L165 that the data are covered over the period 2016-2020. The results shown are for this same period. What about this indication that the data are provided for only 3 periods (2014, 2015, 2016)? Has this been analyzed? to what extent the availability of these data would have changed the methodology and in particular the determination of the indicator variables, which is rather limited here, in relation to the announced issue.

L465-468: “This study partially solves the problem of measuring the harmonious sustainable development of an industrial enterprise. Diagnostics of sustainable development factors allows stating the positive dynamics of the environmental factor, which may indicate a shift in the enterprise's focus on addressing environmental issues”: the authors should first demonstrate that the variables they have chosen are sufficient to express the company's sustainable development. As well as the notion of "harmonious" sustainable development should be further developed

L473-474: “a proactive approach to the management of financial flows”: What indication of orientation of financial flows in order to achieve a more sustainable development of the company allows your study?

Previous papers by Shinkevich et al are cited but not « Forecasting the Efficiency of Innovative Industrial Systems Based on Neural Networks », how does this study relate to that one?

Author Response

Thank you for your work and valuable comments!

They are certainly important for our current and future research.

The answer to each comment is provided in the attached file. Take a look, please

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The theme of this research study is interesting and is within the scope of JRFM. However, this manuscript requires major revision before recommendation for publication in view of following:

It is suggested to improve the flow of communication. Proofreading is suggested.

What is need of this study?

What are the objectives of this study?

Strengthening of literature review section is suggested. Refer recent and relevant papers from the reputed literature sources.

Focus on the research methodology section. Justify it?

Clarify the contribution of this study.

Highlight the novelty of this study.

Rewrite the Conclusion section accordingly

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments and recommendations.

We tried to answer and supplement the material.

The answer to each comment is presented in the attached file.

Please take a look.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 Development the financial flow model for the sustainable de- velopment of an industrial enterprise  This is well written manuscript and I like it. However, this paper needs some improvement before it could be published. My comments are as follows.

1.      The research contribution from both the modeling and literature sides needs to be clarified more.

2.      There are some repetitions and inaccurate expressions. I think the English would greatly benefit from additional polishing.

3.      The authors have not properly written and built the introduction section. Please do note that in the introduction section you need to motivate the research area and find the research gap (what this study tries to fill). Currently, from my perspective research area is not written properly to motivate the reader, the research gap is vague and even references are not enough to justify the topic. Please follow and cite some recent research papers such as: “Alternative energy and natural resources in determining environmental sustainability: a look at the role of government final consumption expenditures in France”, “The impact of economic complexity, technology advancements, and nuclear energy consumption on the ecological footprint of the USA: Towards circular economy initiatives”, “A non-linear analysis of the impacts of natural resources and education on environmental quality: Green energy and its role in the future”, “Roles of trilemma in the world energy sector and transition towards sustainable energy: A study of economic growth and the environment”.

4.      The significance of this paper needs to be highlighted more.

5.      The authors should explain more the reason for the selection of sample.

6.      Literature review is quite inadequate. Moreover, the manuscript could be substantially improved by relying and citing more on recent literature such as the followings: “Modeling factors of biogas technology adoption: a roadmap towards environmental sustainability and green revolution”, “Combined nonlinear effects of urbanization and economic growth on CO2 emissions in Malaysia. An application of QARDL and KRLS”.

7.      The overall presentation is needed to be improved and scientific.

8.      Policy implications are quite vague. In a study, “World energy trilemma and transformative energy developments as determinants of economic growth amid environmental sustainability”, “ Households’ perception-based factors influencing biogas adoption: Innovation diffusion framework”, authors explained the policy implications one by one as per directions of the log run estimates.

Authors are expected to consider these points carefully while revising their work.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable comments and recommendations.

We tried to answer and supplement the material.

The answer to each comment is presented in the attached file. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The author/s have addressed the review comments satisfactorily