Sihan Zhang

Against the backdrop of the synergistic development of digitalization and green transformation, supply chain digitalization (SCD) plays a significant role in supporting companies’ green development; however, it remains unclear how it affects greenwashing. This study uses supply chain innovation and application pilots as a quasi-experimental design and employs panel data from Chinese A-share listed companies (2009–2024) and the difference-in-differences (DID) method to conduct theoretical analysis and empirical testing. The results indicate that SCD significantly curbs corporate greenwashing; this conclusion holds even after robustness tests such as parallel trends tests, propensity score matching, and placebo tests. Mechanism analysis indicates that SCD curbs corporate greenwashing through two channels: (1) enhancing corporate green technological innovation capability and (2) alleviating information asymmetry. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that SCD’s inhibitory effect on corporate greenwashing is more pronounced among firms with higher debt financing costs, greater institutional investor ownership, and greater media coverage. From the perspective of SCD, this study offers insights for promoting corporate green transitions and enhancing ESG transparency, while providing practical guidance for government regulators to combat greenwashing.

Fulfilling corporate ESG responsibilities enhances a firm’s sustainable development capabilities but also comes at an economic cost. This study investigates whether firms should invest heavily in ESG or maintain moderate ESG practices to balance cost efficiency and resilience. Using a sample of A-share listed companies in China from 2012 to 2024, we employ OLS regression models to explore the impact of ESG responsibility fulfillment on cost stickiness and the factors that influence this relationship. The study finds that (1) there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between corporate ESG responsibility fulfillment and cost stickiness; (2) the turning point lies between the B and CCC Huazheng ESG rating levels. Below this level, ESG responsibility fulfillment reduces cost stickiness, while above it, excessive ESG fulfillment increases cost stickiness; (3) environmental sensitivity, managerial overconfidence, and state ownership amplify this non-linear effect, making the reduction or increase in cost stickiness more pronounced. This paper deepens the understanding of the drivers of cost stickiness from the perspective of ESG responsibility fulfillment, offering new insights for future research on cost behavior and providing valuable guidance for firms seeking to optimize cost management through ESG strategies.

Against the backdrop of China’s dual-carbon goals and the growing emphasis on sustainable development, ESG information has become an important non-financial signal in capital markets; yet whether and how it is priced by investors remains unclear. Using a sample of 2018–2024 Chinese A-share listed firms, this study examines the relationship between corporate ESG ratings and firm market value, with a particular focus on the mediating role of institutional ownership and investor heterogeneity. We find that firms with higher ESG ratings exhibit significantly higher market value, indicating that the market assigns a valuation premium to favorable ESG evaluations. Mediation analyses further show that higher ESG ratings are associated with increased institutional ownership, which in turn enhances firm value. Heterogeneity analyses reveal that this mediating effect is primarily driven by long-term institutional investors, whereas medium-term and short-term institutions neither respond systematically to ESG ratings nor transmit ESG rating information into firm valuation. In additional analyses, we show that ESG rating divergence significantly weakens the positive valuation effect of ESG ratings by increasing informational uncertainty and reducing the credibility of ESG rating signals. Overall, this study provides new evidence on the investor-based mechanisms underlying ESG rating-based pricing and highlights the importance of improving the transparency and comparability of ESG ratings in China’s capital market.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has brought unprecedented impact and opportunities for the sustainable development of family firms. This paper examines the impact of AI on innovation investment in family firms using a sample of Chinese A-share listed family firms from 2007 to 2024. The results show that AI significantly promotes innovation investment in family firms to achieve sustainable development. Mechanism analysis shows that AI enhances both the willingness and capability of family firms to invest in innovation by improving their risk-taking levels and resource allocation efficiency, thereby promoting innovation investment. Heterogeneity analysis shows that the promotion effect of AI on innovation investment of family firms is more significant in smaller family firms, those directly founded by families, those with more family involvement in management, and those prior to intergenerational succession. Furthermore, the study finds that AI significantly improves the innovation performance of family firms. Our findings provide important theoretical and practical guidance for enterprises seeking to leverage AI to catalyze innovation investment and thereby achieve long-term value growth and sustainable development.

Climate risks arising from carbon emissions have become a major global challenge, constraining economic development and exerting complex effects on firms’ operations at the micro level. This study examines A-share-listed companies from 2009 to 2023, calculating the extent of carbon risks and the degree of greenwashing. Our results show that carbon risks suppress greenwashing among these enterprises, with financing constraints and the quality of internal controls positively moderating this effect from both external and internal perspectives. This suggests that the pressure imposed by carbon risks encourages enterprises to prioritize environmental concerns and actively disclose relevant information. Additionally, governments and regulatory authorities should increase their policy and regulatory pressures on these enterprises, guiding them to confront environmental challenges, assume significant responsibility for ecological protection, and formulate sustainable development strategies to enhance their competitiveness and long-term viability.