Sustainable Development and Corporate Sustainability of Chilean State Universities: Evidence from Their Strategic Elements
, Claudio Mancilla 2, Walter Sáez 3, Francisco Ganga-Contreras 3 and Ivette Durán-Seguel 4
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please include the following comments:
1) Add introduction sentence to abstract.
2) It is necessary to explain differences between “corporate sustainability” and “university sustainability” (and the process of developing these topics as well). In my opinion it is not possible to use term “corporate sustainability in universities“, it is more complicated. Explain the topic sustainability development in university context in the introduction section. Emphasise the importance and the need to address this issue.
3) Develop the theoretical basis of sustainable development and social responsibility of HEIs.
4) Methodology should be explained in detail in the methodology section, not the essence of SGS. Explain the essence of SGS as part of a literature review. In this section, clearly specify the methodology used, with reference to the work of other authors.
5) Combine table 1 and table 2 into one table.
6) Delete Appendix A. Concepts and strengths identified in each SDG, in Spanish.
7) “Figures” 1, 2 and 3 are not figures however tables.
8) Findings are not discussed in the context of work of other authors.
9) The limiting factors and implication of the article are not mentioned.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
We appreciate your comments as it allows us to incorporate some new reflections, and explain our methodology and conclusions in a better way.
Following your recommendations and comments we undertook the following changes:
1) In the Abstract, as an introduction we included the text:
‘Corporate sustainability has evolved in line with the advancement of the concept of sustainable development; also, it is constituted as a strategy to respond to social and environmental problems. In this context, Universities are complex organizations, positioned as a key mechanism for delivering the sustainable development of society.’
2) In order to discuss the importance and the need to study the concept/strategy of corporate sustainability in universities, we have incorporated some reflections and ten new references in section 2.2 Corporate Sustainability and Universities.
3) Following your recommendation:
- Table 1 and Table 2 were combined into one table. (Now, only Table 1)
- Appendix A was deleted.
- ‘Figures’ 1, 2 and 3 now are Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5.
4) Regarding the comment: Methodology should be explained in detail in the methodology section. We re-order part of the section.
- a) We renamed section 3.2 to ‘Method for the Analysis of Missions, Visions and Strategic Objectives’.
- b) We indicated the strategic plans were downloaded from the universities’ official web pages.
- c) Related concepts and strong ideas were identified for each SDG. We used the document ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. These concepts and ideas were identified through discourse analysis.
- d) From every University’s strategic plan, the Missions, Visions and Strategic Objectives were identified.
- e) A search was made in the texts of each mission, vision and strategic objectives in order to create three matrices (tables) and a summary table that display whether the different SDGs have been included or not in the institutional strategic elements-
- f) Also, the six new references were incorporated into the section.
5) Other authors were incorporated in the section: ‘Discussion and Conclusions’. Also, limiting factors and implications of the article are now mentioned.
Again, we welcome your feedback.
Reviewer 2 Report
- Good choice of subject area, very original. Universities are responsible of creating leaders of tomorrow. With great power comes great responsibility.
- However, there is some work to be done with regards to recommendations and future research. For example, it is essential to ascertain how these strategies/plans are tangibilised. For example, how will Universities address the issues of bullying and racism, which is a growing concern.
- It is also important not to confuse between compliance and alignment with SDGs. Many strategies and plans are solely there to ensure on compliance. How can to be ascertained that it is not only compliance but tangible commitment to the SDGs?
- To upgrade references. Referencing seems very poor. Some references are repeating, for example, line 238 and line 240.
- Please check figure 3, since that section is reefing to ranking, this should be reflected in the table, maybe by highlights the highest rank or re-arranging the list based on ranking.
- Overall the subject area a very good thought. It can be further expanded.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
We appreciate your comments as it allows us to incorporate some reflections into our conclusions.
Following your recommendations and comments we included the following changes:
1) In the conclusions, we extended the limitations and challenges. Also, other references were incorporated in the section,
2) In the section of results, we re-ordered all tables to visualise each university's results better.
(According to the recommendation of another reviewer, we renamed the figures as tables).
3) We incorporated six new references in the methodology section.
4) Considering your comments and from other reviewers, we incorporated 21 new references.
Again, we welcome your feedback.
Reviewer 3 Report
The issue of sustainable development and its goals is extremely important for all organizations. With regard to universities, it seems particularly important, because they educate future decision-makers, on whom the state of the whole world will depend. The authors undertook to investigate how 18 universities in Chile implement the goals of sustainable development in the vision, mission and strategy (strategic goals and elements). This task was carried out correctly, and therefore the conclusions drawn from it well determine the state of incorporation of the Sustainable Development goals in the documents of the surveyed universities. Nevertheless, in order to make the text of the article more perfect, the authors should make the following corrections:
1. It is better to characterize the research method, i.e. website content analysis. This method has already been described in detail and it is worth quoting at least briefly
2. Insert a short comment under figure 5, because there is no reference to it in the text of the article, and it seems important from the point of view of the similarity index used.
The discussion lacks reference to similar studies conducted in other countries. If such studies have not been conducted, this lack should be indicated as a research gap that this study fills
Author Response
Dear Reviewer
We are grateful for your comments, as they allowed us to extend our conclusions and associated implications.
Following your recommendations and comments we undertook the following changes:
1)We re-ordered part of the section Material and Methos.
- a) We renamed section 3.2 to “Method for the Analysis of Missions, Visions and Strategic Objectives”.
- b) Now, we indicated the strategic plans were downloaded from the universities’ official web pages.
- c) Related concepts and strong ideas were identified for each SDG. We used the document ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. These concepts and ideas were identified through discourse analysis.
- d) From every University’s strategic plan, the Missions, Visions and Strategic Objectives were identified.
- e) A search was made in the texts of each mission, vision and strategic objectives in order to create three matrices (tables) and a summary table that display whether the different SDGs have been included or not in the institutional strategic elements.
- f) Also, the six new references were incorporated into the section.
2) Regarding the comment: ‘Insert a short comment under figure 5’.
We moved the text next to figure (now figure 1) to explain it.
3) In the conclusions, we extended the limitations and challenges. Also, we incorporated some references to discuss the results.
4) Considering your comments and from other reviewers, we incorporated 21 new references.
Again, we welcome your feedback.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All my comments have been incorporated. Thank you for opportunity to review this manuscript.
