eva

Eva Thesis Draft - Political Environment and Firms' CSR Decisions 🔗

• Your introduction has improved significantly over the previous draft. The study is now clearly motivated and anchored in the literature!

• The definition of political environment is maybe not of primordial importance for the introduction, but can be relegated to the literature review. You just want to tell the reader that you’ve found an additional determinant of CSR decisions, and shortly recapitulate the argumentation underlying that determinant.

  • So the last two paragraphs on p. 6 might be redundant or relegated elsewhere
  • Same is true for much on p. 8

• Structure of the literature review

  • I would omit the header theoretical framework and integrate the text into the preceding two headers
  • It is not wrong, but it is also too long (in my opinion) and contains redundancies

• Methodology

  • I think it’s a nice exposition, but maybe it should be slightly shorter
    • Sometimes it looks as if you have tried to write it up for yourself in order to better understand it
    • Which is good, but for exposition, some things might be omitted
  • In addition, you do not (yet) pay attention to the issue that firms might anticipate elections, which may be important in your empirical strategy

• The descriptive statistics look very nice!

• The specifications of the regression models are correct, but the last sentence in your methodology is not for the setting you use

• The regression output is not fully correct yet, but shows promising results

  • I do not get why the variable ‘Change’ is there - what is it?

  • You should exclude the constant term so that all dummies have a coefficient estimate, and none of them becomes ‘the reference group’. That facilitates interpretation.

  • You can do fixed effects regression with xtset country-variable time-variable and then xtreg csr indep_variabels, fe