Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and Institutional Ownership

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper deals with the question of whenever corporate digitalization can promote green innovation.  On the basis of an extensive literature search and statistical processing of extensive data from the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets ( 2012 to 2018) this study explains the mechanism through which digitalization stimulates corporate green innovation at the organizational level, and empirically tests the impact of digitalization on corporate green innovation.

The manuscript is well-structured and relevant for the field of implementation of green innovation. The chosen method of testing three hypotheses led the research to the desired results, its use is considered appropriate.

I have suggestions for improving the paper that does not question its quality. I consider the paper to be too long and extensive in the review section. Please shorten the abstract for clarity - it should be more specific for chosen method and results. The Introduction is too long, it takes the form of a literature review, I suggest shortening it.

Author Response

Dear reviewer：

Thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript entitled “Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and Institutional Ownership.” (ID: sustainability-1492132). Thank you for your affirmation regarding this study. We found all your comments to be constructive and necessary for us to improve the quality of the article and improve its academic literacy. We are grateful! Based on your suggestions, we have made corresponding modifications to the manuscript, which are shown point by point as follows:

Point 1: The paper is considered to be too long and extensive in the review section.

Response 1: Thank you for your valuable comments. We have deleted the citations that were irrelevant to the theme in the review section and summarized the relevant literature from the perspective of the economic value and environmental value of digitalization. Excessive introductions to green innovation were deleted, and reviews of the literature on the determinants of green innovation were emphasized. The revised content is found in section 2. Literature Review.

 

Point 2: Please shorten the abstract for clarity - it should be more specific for chosen method and results.

Response 2: Thank you for your valuable and thoughtful comments. We shortened the abstract ,and we have supplemented the description of the results so that the abstract clearly describes the chosen methods and results. The revised content is found in the abstract.

Point 3: The Introduction is too long, it takes the form of a literature review, it is suggested being shorten.

Response 3: Thank you for your valuable and helpful suggestions. We have shortened and revised the introduction. We removed citations unrelated to the focal research question, emphasizing the motivation for this study. The revised content is in paragraph 1–2 of section 1. Introduction.

We have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word.

Once again, we would like to express our great appreciation for your encouraging and constructive comments and suggestions, which have helped us to improve the quality of the paper.

Sincerely,

All the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper explores the impact of digitalization on green innovation and examines the relationship between digitalization and sustainability. The findings provide new insights on the role of digitalization on sustainability and highlight the determinants of green innovation in increasing the value of corporate digital transformation. Therefore, the paper has merit with contribution to scholarship. Though the paper can be improved in some critical areas. The context of the research is explained and the objective is clear, but the focal research question being addressed is missing. In the research design, the sample size (number of companies) for the data is not clear. It is also not convincing that information from annual reports is used as the basis for evaluating corporate digitalization, though this is explained as a limitation. The findings and results are well presented, though the study implications for academia and practitioners could be more clearly stated. A lot grammatical errors could be improved throughout the paper.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript entitled “Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and Institutional Ownership.” (ID: sustainability-1492132). Thank you for your affirmation regarding this study. We found all your comments to be constructive and necessary for us to improve the quality of the article and improve its academic literacy. We are grateful! Based on your suggestions, we have made corresponding modifications to the manuscript, which are shown point by point as follows:

Point 1: The context of the research is explained and the objective is clear, but the focal research question being addressed is missing.

Response 1: Thank you very much for this valuable comment. We have added content for developing the focal research question and restructured texts in the introduction section. The revised content is in paragraph 1–2 of section 1. Introduction.

Point 2: In the research design, the sample size (number of companies) for the data is not clear.

Response 2: Thank you for your careful review. The sample size (number of companies) was not clearly stated in the original manuscript. We have stated the sample size and number of companies more clearly in the research design section of the revised paper. In total, 9,085 firm-year observations were obtained from 2,254 companies from 2012 to 2018. The revised content is in the second last sentence of section 4.1. Sample and Data.

Point 3: It is also not convincing that information from annual reports is used as the basis for evaluating corporate digitalization, though this is explained as a limitation.

Response 3: Thank you for your valuable comment. Although text analysis is a concrete and feasible way to characterize a company’s level of digitization, it is not completely convincing to measure corporate digitization level based on the annual report. We have made the following modifications to make the research conclusions more convincing:

First, we have added content about the rationality and applicability of the measurement method of corporate digitization in the research design section. We added “Additionally, managers have a comprehensive understanding of the activities of the company, and their summary of the company’s operation is reflected in the relevant description of the annual report[81]. The statements in the annual reports can express corporates’ operational status[82] and reflect the corporate business philosophy and development path of the company.” The supplementary content is presented in paragraph 1 of section 4.2.2. Independent Variable.

Second, an extended analysis was performed. We measured the level of digital technology application based on regional digital infrastructure, and the regression analysis results showed that digital technology application also has a positive impact on green innovation. The supplementary content is in section 5.5.2. Application of Digital Technology and Green Innovation.

Point 4: The findings and results are well presented, though the study implications for academia and practitioners could be more clearly stated.

Response 4: Thank you for your thoughtful suggestion. In the discussion section, we have emphasized the study implications for academia and practitioners by clearly stating them in different paragraphs. The revised content is in paragraphs 2–4 of section 6. Discussion.

Point 5: A lot grammatical errors could be improved throughout the paper.

Response 5: We appreciate your valuable and kind advice, and we apologize for the language problems in the original manuscript. We have carefully proofread the manuscript to minimize grammatical, wording, and expression errors. The manuscript has been thoroughly edited by a professional editing company, and the contents of the paper are now presented in a better manner.

We have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word.

Once again, we would like to express our great appreciation for your encouraging and constructive comments and suggestions, which have helped us to improve the quality of the paper.

Sincerely,

All the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article addresses an interesting topic of great practical importance.  The research assumptions, literature review, research design and conclusions are adequately described.  Overall, the article is well written and informative.

However, the conclusion section could be improved by indicating more specific future research directions.

The academic language is correct, however, some expressions, wording and styles could be improved.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your comments on our manuscript entitled “Can Corporate Digitalization Promote Green Innovation? The Moderating Roles of Internal Control and Institutional Ownership.” (ID: sustainability-1492132). Thank you for your affirmation regarding this study. We found all your comments to be constructive and necessary for us to improve the quality of the article and improve its academic literacy. We are grateful! Based on your suggestions, we have made corresponding modifications to the manuscript, which are shown point by point as follows:

Point 1: The conclusion section could be improved by indicating more specific future research directions.

Response 1: Thank you for your valuable and thoughtful comments. In the conclusion, we have stated three specific future research directions, including how to measure the level of corporate digitization more effectively, other mechanisms by which digitization promotes green innovation, and whether digitization can play a crucial role in corporate green innovation in other countries. The revised content is in the last paragraph of section 7. Conclusion.

Point 2: The academic language is correct, however, some expressions, wording and styles could be improved.

Response 2: We are grateful for your valuable and kind advice, and we apologize for the language problems in the original manuscript. We have carefully proofread the manuscript to minimize inappropriate expressions, wording, and styles. The manuscript has been thoroughly edited by a professional editing company, and the contents of the paper are now presented in a better manner.

We have uploaded a copy of the original manuscript with all the changes highlighted by using the track changes mode in MS Word.

Once again, we would like to express our great appreciation for your encouraging and constructive comments and suggestions, which have helped us to improve the quality of the paper.

Sincerely,

All the authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf