THE FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPULSE PURCHASES OF ONLINE KNOWLEDGE-BASED PAID PRODUCTS BASED ON THE CIFE MODEL—THE MODERATING EFFECT OF CONSUMER CONFIDENCE
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In the context of global sustainable development, green transition and low-carbon development have become essential pathways for enterprise growth. Digital transformation, especially driven by technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, blockchain, and cloud computing, has become a key driver of corporate competitiveness and environmental performance. Given that China’s manufacturing sector is a major source of pollution, a critical research issue is how to improve corporate environmental performance through digital transformation and green technological innovation. Based on the sustainable development theory, green technological innovation theory, and other related perspectives, this study constructed a model to examine the impact of digital transformation on corporate environmental performance, examining the mediating role of green technological innovation and the moderating effect of environmental regulation. Using panel data from Chinese listed companies in the Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share markets from 2010 to 2022, fixed effects and threshold effects models were employed for empirical analysis. The results indicate that: (1) digital transformation has a significant positive impact on corporate environmental performance; (2) green technological innovation plays a mediating role between digital transformation and environmental performance; (3) command-and-control, market-based, and voluntary environmental regulations have a negative moderating effect on the relationship between digital transformation and green technological innovation, suggesting that excessive regulation may inhibit the effectiveness of digital transformation; (4) market-based environmental regulation plays a positive moderating role in the impact of green technological innovation on corporate environmental performance. The study also finds that the moderating effect of environmental regulation has a threshold, indicating that its impact depends on the intensity or implementation method. This research provides theoretical support for corporate green and digital transformation and offers practical insights for optimizing environmental regulation policies.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Chinese Journal of Social Science and Management Editorial Division
The Office of Research and Development, Panyapiwat Institute of Management
85/1 Moo 2, Chaengwattana Rd., Bang Talat, Pakkred, Nonthaburi 11120, Thailand
Tel. 02 855 01048 E-mail: cjssm@pim.ac.th
References
Ambec, S., & Lanoie, P. (2008). Does it pay to be green?: A systematic overview. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(4), 45-62.
Conrad, K., & Wastl, D. (1995). The impact of environmental regulation on productivity in German industries. Empirical Economics, 20, 615-633.
Delmas, M. A., & Montes-Sancho, M. J. (2011). An institutional perspective on the diffusion of international management system standards: The case of the environmental management standard ISO 14001. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(1), 103-132.
Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. Science Policy Research Unit University of Sussex and Pinter Publishers.
Geroski, P. A. (2000). Models of technology diffusion. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 603-625.
Greaker, M. (2006). Spillovers in the development of new pollution abatement technology: A new look at the Porter-hypothesis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 52(1), 411-420.
Hansen, B. E. (1999). Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference. Journal of Econometrics, 93(2), 345-368.
Horbach, J. (2008). Determinants of environmental innovation-new evidence from German panel data sources. Research Policy, 37(1), 163-173.
Jaffe, A. B., & Palmer, K. (1997). Environmental regulation and innovation: A panel data study. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(4), 610-619.
Klassen, R., & McLaughlin, C. (1996). The impact of environmental management on firm performance. Management Science, 42(8), 1199-1214.
Li, R., & Ramanathan, R. (2018). Exploring the relationships between different types of environmental regulations and environmental performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 1329-1340.
Lyon, T. P., & Maxwell, J. W. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and the environment: A theoretical perspective. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 240-260.
Pigou, A. C. (1920). The economics of welfare. Macmillan.
Porter, M. E., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97-118.
Ren, X., Zeng, H., & Zhao, L. (2022). Environmental regulation, technological innovation, and corporate green development: Empirical evidence from China’s manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 348, 131281. [in Chinese]
Verma, P., Kumar, V., Yalcin, H., & Daim, T. (2023). Organizational architecture of strategic entrepreneurial firms for digital transformation: A bibliometric analysis. Technology in Society, 75, 102355.
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
Wu, F., Hu, H. Z., Lin, H. Y., & Ren, X. Y. (2021). Corporate digital transformation and capital market performance: Empirical evidence from stock liquidity. Management World, (7), 130-144. [in Chinese]
Wu, S., & Li, Y. (2023). A study on the impact of digital transformation on corporate ESG performance: The mediating role of green innovation. Sustainability, 15(8), 6568. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086568
Yang, Z., Chen, J., & Ling, H. C. (2023). Media attention, environmental policy uncertainty, and corporate green technology innovation: Empirical evidence from Chinese A-share listed companies. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, (4), 1-15. [in Chinese]
