Corporate Social Responsibility (A Literature Review)

Vijay Vishwakarma

Assistant Professor, S M Shetty College, Powai, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date


Accepted Date


Published Date



Accepted Level

Reviewer’s Comments to Authors

Major Comments

  1. Abstract is not fulfilling its purpose. Abstract should cover the complete need of the study and more number of keywords can be given. So the readers of the article can get narrative view of the entire study.
  2. In the limitation of the study the author have suggested that the future study can be done by using primary data and also mentioned that ‘some correlation can be performed between the two’ what it is means for? Without giving any ideas about variables for future studies how an author can suggest that correction can be performed between two??
  3. None of given objective has been analyzed or discussed in the study. Abstract and research objective says that the main aim of the study is ‘to understand the importance of CSR for the economic development of the society and to review and fill the gap in the previous literature of corporate social responsibility.’ It has to be fulfill in the paper by analyzing the given objectives.
  4. Also, mention how your results compare to (reference given to author) another study which was published very recently as mentioned in the objective of the study.
  5. Paper is not giving concise conclusion. It is random where most of the points are not related to the study. Too many information has given randomly which is not particularly meet out the need for the study. The author should eliminate some data which is not relevant to the study.
  6. Author has given only the primary objective of the study where it should prepared with secondary objectives of the study.
  7. There is no information on data collection, period of study, techniques used for collecting the data, footnote and findings for the study. The author should focus on the above mentioned parts which are mainly needed for a research study.

Minor Comments

  1. Non-frequency of the contents is there which are to be given more concentrate for valuable research study.
  2. Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research. Unnecessary wordings should be avoided.
  3. For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.