How Tripartite Stakeholders Promote Green Technology Innovation of China’s Heavily Polluting Enterprises?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Hypotheses and Model
3.1. The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Green Technology Innovation in China’s Heavily Polluting Enterprises
3.2. The Mediating Role of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
3.3. The Moderating Role of Public Attention
4. Research Design
4.1. Samples and Data Sources
4.2. Variable Selection
4.2.1. Independent Variable—ER
4.2.2. Dependent Variable—GTI
4.2.3. Mediating Variable—CSR
4.2.4. Moderating Variable—Media Coverage (MC)
4.2.5. Control Variables
4.3. Model Design
5. Empirical Results
5.1. Descriptive Statistics
5.2. Correlation Analyses
5.3. Regression Analyses
5.4. Robustness Analyses
5.5. Further Analyses
6. Discussion
7. Conclusions and Policy Implications
7.1. Conclusions
7.2. Policy Implications
8. Research limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wolf, M.J.; Emerson, J.W.; Esty, D.C.; de Sherbinin, A.; Wendling, Z.A. Environmental Performance Index; Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy: New Haven, CT, USA, 2022; Available online: https://epi.yale.edu/downloads/epi2022report06062022.pdf (accessed on 5 June 2023).
- Peng, H.; Shen, N.; Ying, H.Q.; Wang, Q.W. Can environmental regulation directly promote green innovation behavior? Based on situation of industrial agglomeration. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 314, 128044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.Q.; Hu, Z.Y.; Zhang, Q. Environmental regulation, economic policy uncertainty, and green technology innovation. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2021, 23, 2975–2988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenstone, M.; Hanna, R. Environmental regulations, air and water pollution, and infant mortality in India. Am. Econ. Rev. 2014, 104, 3038–3072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sanchez, C.M.; McKinley, W. Environmental regulatory influence and product innovation: The contingency effects of organizational characteristics. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 1998, 15, 257–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheldon, O. The social responsibility of management. In The Philosophy of Management; Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons Ltd.: London, UK, 1924. [Google Scholar]
- Li, C.; Wang, Z.J.; Wang, L.P. Factors affecting firms’ green technology innovation: An evolutionary game based on prospect theory. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2023, 195, 227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, W.H.; Li, N.; Liu, F. Three parties’ evolutionary game of stakeholders in green technology innovation and their simulation. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. 2021, 30, 216–224. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, Z.; Liang, D.; Li, S. Environmental regulation and green technology innovation: Evidence from China’s heavily polluting companies. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mechrabian, A.; Russell, J.A. An Approach to Environmental Psychology; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
- Jaffe, A.B.; Palmer, K. Environmental regulation and innovation: A panel data study. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1997, 79, 610–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Porter, M.E.; Van der Linde, C. Towards a new conception of the environmental-competitiveness relationship. Econ. Perspect. 1995, 9, 97–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cai, W.G.; Li, Q.Q. Study on the dual impact of environmental regulation on enterprise ecological technology innovation. Sci. Res. Manag. 2019, 40, 87–95. [Google Scholar]
- Behera, P.; Sethi, N. Nexus between environment regulation, FDI, and green technology innovation in OECD countries. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 52940–52953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chakraborty, P.; Chatterjee, C. Does environmental regulation indirectly induce upstream innovation? New evidence from India. Res. Policy 2017, 46, 939–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muhammad, B.; Khan, S. Effect of bilateral FDI, energy consumption, CO2 emission and capital on economic growth of Asia countries. Energy Rep. 2019, 5, 1305–1315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunner, M.S.B.; Cohen, M.A. Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2003, 45, 278–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubashkina, Y.; Galeotti, M.; Verdolini, E. Environmental regulation and competitiveness: Empirical evidence on the porter hypothesis from European manufacturing sectors. Energy Policy 2005, 83, 288–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Suki, N.M.; Suki, N.M.; Afshan, S.; Sharif, A.; Kasim, M.A.; Hanafi, S.R.M. How does green technology innovation affect green growth in ASEAN-6 countries? Evidence from advance panel estimations. Gondwana Res. 2022, 111, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teeter, P.; Sandberg, J. Constraining or enabling green capability development? How policy uncertainty affects organizational responses to flexible environmental regulations. Br. J. Manag. 2017, 28, 649–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Triebswetter, U.; Wackerbauer, J. Integrated environmental product innovation in the region of Munich and its impact on company competitiveness. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1484–1493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Y.; Xia, X.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, D.P. Environmental regulation, government R&D funding and green technology innovation: Evidence from China provincial data. Sustainability 2018, 10, 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yin, X.; Chen, D.; Ji, J. How does environmental regulation influence green technological innovation? Moderating effect of green finance. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 342, 118112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Hu, H.; Zhu, G.; You, D. The impact of environmental regulation on enterprises’ green innovation under the constraint of external financing: Evidence from China’s industrial firms. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 30, 42943–42964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, P.; Xie, S.; Qi, F.; Huang, Y.; Wu, X. Environmental regulation and green technology innovation under the carbon neutrality goal: Dual regulation of human capital and industrial structure. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Lai, X.; Zhang, F. Research on green innovation effect of industrial agglomeration from perspective of environmental regulation: Evidence in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 288, 125583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bocquet, R.; Le Bas, C.; Mothe, C.; Poussing, N. CSR, innovation, and firm performance in Sluggish growth contexts: A firm-Level empirical analysis. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 146, 241–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ruggiero, P.; Cupertino, S. CSR strategic approach, financial resources and corporate social performance: The mediating effect of innovation. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, B.; Ju, T.; Gao, S.S. The combined effects of innovation and corporate social responsibility on firm financial risk. J. Int. Financ. Manag. Account. 2021, 32, 283–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albort-Morant, G.; Henseler, J.; Cepeda-Carrion, G.; Leal-Rodriguez, A.L. Potential and realized absorptive capacity as complementary drivers of green product and process innovation performance. Sustainability 2018, 10, 381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gu, Q.; Wang, W.W.; Zheng, Y. Does corporate social responsibility have an impact on innovation? Based on the heterogeneity of R&D investment and nature of property Right. J. Guizhou Univ. Financ. Econ. 2019, 6, 66–75. [Google Scholar]
- Hull, C.E.; Rothenberg, S. Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2008, 29, 781–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Severo, E.A.; de Guimaraes, J.C.F.; Dorion, E.C.H. Cleaner production, social responsibility and eco-innovation: Generations’ perception for a sustainable future. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 186, 91–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quesnel, K.J.; Ajami, N.K. Changes in water consumption linked to heavy news media coverage of extreme climatic events. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1700784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tang, J.; Li, S. Can public participation promote regional green innovation?—Threshold effect of environmental regulation analysis. Heliyon 2022, 10, e11157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, L.; Zhang, L.; Sun, J.; He, P. Can public participation constraints promote green technological innovation of Chinese enterprises? The moderating role of government environmental regulatory enforcement. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 174, 121198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webster, J.G. The Duality of Media: A structurational theory of public attention. Commun. Theory 2011, 21, 43–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bird, D.K.; Haynes, K.; Van den Honert, R.; McAneney, J.; Poortinga, W. Nuclear power in australia: A comparative analysis of public opinion regarding climate change and the fukushima disaster. Energy Policy 2014, 65, 644–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marciano, J.A.; Lilieholm, R.J.; Teisl, M.F.; Leahy, J.E.; Neupane, B. Factors affecting public support for forest-based biorefineries: A comparison of mill towns and the general public in Maine, USA. Energy Policy 2014, 75, 301–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, X.X.; Hu, Z.P.; Liu, C.S.; Yu, D.J.; Yu, L.F. The relationships between regulatory and customer pressure, green organizational responses, and green innovation performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 3423–3433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simmons, L.E. The aftermath of public attention on accounting improprieties: Effects on securities class action settlements. J. Account. Public Policy 2011, 30, 22–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, A.L.; Liu, X.; Qiu, J.L.; Shen, Y. Can green M&A of heavy polluting enterprises achieve substantial transformation under the pressure of media. China Ind. Econ. 2019, 38, 174–192. [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Cai, X.; Zhu, B.Z.; Zhang, H.J.; Li, L.; Xie, M.Y. Can direct environmental regulation promote green technology innovation in heavily polluting industries? Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 746, 140810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baumol, W.J.; Oates, W.E. The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. Swed. J. Econ. 1971, 73, 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Z.Y.; Wang, X.P.; Liang, C.; Cao, F.; Wang, L. The impact of heterogeneous environmental regulation on innovation of high-tech enterprises in China: Mediating and interaction effect. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 28, 8323–8336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marino, M.; Parrotta, P.; Valletta, G. Electricity (de)regulation and innovation. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 748–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Costantini, V.; Mazzanti, M. On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports. Res. Policy 2012, 41, 132–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kesidou, E.; Demirel, P. On the drivers of eco-innovations: Empirical evidence from the UK. Res. Policy 2012, 41, 862–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inoue, Y.; Lee, S. Effects of different dimensions of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance in tourism related industries. Tour. Manag. 2011, 32, 790–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Youn, H.; Hua, N.; Lee, S. Does size matter? Corporate social responsibility and firm performance in the restaurant industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 51, 127–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- North, D.C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Institutions. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 1990, 18, 142–144. [Google Scholar]
- Kathuria, V. Informal regulation of pollution in a developing country: Evidence from India. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 403–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, J.; Liu, Y. The effects of public attention on the environmental performance of high-polluting firms: Based on big data from web search in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 186, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zyglidopoulos, S.C.; Georgiadis, A.P.; Carroll, C.E.; Siegel, D.S. Does media attention drive corporate social responsibility? J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1622–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.M.; Xing, C.; Zhang, Y. The impact of media coverage on green technology innovation of high-polluting enterprises. Chin. J. Manag. 2021, 18, 557–568. [Google Scholar]
- Li, D.; Zheng, M.; Cao, C.; Chen, X.; Ren, S.; Huang, M. The impact of legitimacy pressure and corporate profitability on green innovation: Evidence from China top 100. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cao, X.; Zhang, L.P. The evolutionary game analysison green technological innovation of enterprises under the environmental regulations: Based on the view of Stakeholder. Syst. Eng. 2017, 35, 103–108. [Google Scholar]
- Becker, G.S.; Murphy, K.M. A simple theory of advertising as a good or bad. Q. J. Econ. 1993, 108, 941–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russell, N.W.; Guggenheim, L.; Mo Jang, S.; Bae, S.Y. The Dynamics of Public Attention: Agenda-Setting Theory Meets Big Data. J. Commun. 2014, 64, 193–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, J.; Peng, T.Q. Googling environmental issues: Web search queries as a measurement of public attention on environmental issues. Internet Res. 2016, 26, 57–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, Y.J.; Xie, R.H. Research on the effect of environmental regulation to industrial restructuring: Empirical test based on provincial panel data of China. China Ind. Econ. 2014, 8, 57–69. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, X.; Sinha, P.; Chen, X.J. Corporate social responsibility and eco-innovation: The triple bottom line perspective. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 28, 214–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, X.; He, Y.Q. Environmental regulation, financing constraints and technological innovation: Inhibition or promotion? Study on heterogeneity based on regulatory effect. In Proceedings of the 14th China Management Annual Meeting, Beijing, China, 28 July–1 August 2019; pp. 166–182. [Google Scholar]
- Bai, M.; Wang, R.X. How does corporate social responsibility affect the persistence of firm innovation? Forum Sci. Technol. China 2020, 1, 107–115. [Google Scholar]
- Timothy, G.P.; Violina, P.R. Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Acad. Manag. J. 2003, 46, 631–642. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Li, Y.X.; Ma, Z.; Song, J.B. Media coverage, environmental regulation and enterprise environmental protection investment. Nankai Bus. Rev. 2017, 20, 83–94. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, F.; Ye, Q.; Li, Y.J. Impacts of interactions between news attention and investor attention on stock returns: Empirical investigation on financial shares in China. J. Manag. Sci. China 2014, 17, 72–85. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Y.Y.; Liu, J.H.; Duan, K.; Huang, L. Research on the threshold effect of corporate social responsibility: Technological innovation and brand value. Soft Sci. 2020, 34, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Baron, R.M.; Kenny, D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986, 51, 1173–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J.; Cohen, P. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analyses for the Behavioral Sciences; Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
- Wen, Z.L.; Liu, H.Y.; Hou, J.T. Analysis of Moderating Effect and Mediating Effect; Educational Science Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Ye, B.J.; Yang, Q.; Hu, Z.Q. The influence of gratitude on adolescents’ academic achievement: A moderating mediating effect. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 2013, 2, 192–199. [Google Scholar]
- Zhong, L.F.; Meng, J.; Gao, L. The impact of moral leadership on employee innovation performance: The mediating role of social exchange and the moderating role of power distance orientation. Manag. World 2019, 5, 149–160. [Google Scholar]
Variable | Variable Name | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ER | Environment Regulation | 680 | 0.847 | 0.120 | 0.338 | 0.997 |
GTI | Green Technology Innovation | 680 | 16.319 | 43.177 | 0 | 440 |
CSR | Corporate Social Responsibility | 680 | 40.368 | 13.198 | 18.340 | 85.499 |
MC | Media Coverage | 680 | 179.985 | 293.380 | 0 | 1867 |
MTB | Market to Book | 680 | 2.632 | 1.826 | 0.152 | 10.710 |
LEV | Financial Leverage | 680 | 1.567 | 1.022 | 0.355 | 8.882 |
ROA | Return On Assets | 680 | 0.053 | 0.045 | −0.009 | 0.292 |
Top1 | Largest Holder Rate | 680 | 39.429 | 15.500 | 6.410 | 82.510 |
Tobin Q | TobinQ | 680 | 1.749 | 0.949 | 0.805 | 8.002 |
Age | Enterprise Age | 680 | 10.821 | 5.777 | 0 | 25 |
Cflow | Cash Flow | 680 | 0.069 | 0.070 | −0.470 | 0.347 |
GTI | ER | CSR | MC | MTB | LEV | ROA | Top1 | TobinQ | Age | C_Flow | VIF | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTI | 1.000 | - | ||||||||||
ER | 0.138 *** | 1.000 | 1.04 | |||||||||
CSR | 0.525 *** | 0.135 *** | 1.000 | 1.31 | ||||||||
MC | 0.268 *** | 0.069 * | 0.178 *** | 1.000 | 1.12 | |||||||
MTB | −0.334 *** | −0.060 | −0.359 *** | 0.007 | 1.000 | 4.23 | ||||||
LEV | 0.113 *** | 0.057 | 0.028 | −0.132 *** | −0.136 *** | 1.000 | 1.34 | |||||
ROA | −0.155 *** | 0.026 | −0.103 *** | 0.199 *** | 0.358 *** | −0.463 *** | 1.000 | 2.01 | ||||
Top1 | 0.311 *** | −0.017 | 0.313 *** | 0.174 *** | −0.179 *** | 0.087 ** | −0.058 | 1.000 | 1.15 | |||
TobinQ | −0.347 *** | −0.025 | −0.320 *** | −0.006 | 0.863 *** | −0.192 *** | 0.403 *** | −0.162 *** | 1.000 | 4.30 | ||
Age | −0.076 *** | −0.031 | −0.087 ** | −0.080 ** | 0.013 | 0.106 *** | −0.011 | 0.021 | 0.102 *** | 1.000 | 1.07 | |
Cflow | −0.052 | 0.065 * | 0.020 | 0.071 * | 0.113 *** | −0.167 *** | 0.516 *** | 0.000 | 0.162 *** | 0.069 * | 1.000 | 1.41 |
Model (0) | Model (1) | |
---|---|---|
Variable | GTI | GTI |
ER | 1.706 *** (3.70) | |
MTB | −0.105 * (−1.71) | −0.084 (−1.38) |
LEV | 0.069 (1.11) | 0.049 (0.79) |
ROA | −0.213 (−0.12) | −0.476 (−0.28) |
Top1 | 0.027 *** (7.27) | 0.027 *** (7.46) |
Tobin Q | −0.314 ** (−2.60) | −0.339 *** (−2.83) |
Age | −0.018 * (−1.85) | −0.016 * (−1.67) |
Cflow | 0.143 (0.15) | −0.024 (−0.03) |
Year, Industry, Province FE | Yes | Yes |
Constant | 1.135 *** (4.64) | −0.300 (−0.65) |
N | 680 | 680 |
R2 | 0.195 | 0.211 |
F | 23.21 | 22.40 |
Model (2) | Model (3) | Model (4) | Model (5) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | CSR | GTI | GTI | GTI |
ER | 0.302 *** (3.41) | 1.095 ** (2.55) | ||
CSR | 2.081 *** (11.31) | 2.020 *** (10.93) | 1.705 *** (9.33) | |
MC | 0.288 *** (8.28) | |||
CSR × MC | 0.447 *** (3.90) | |||
MTB | −0.052 *** (−4.44) | 0.012 (0.20) | 0.021 (0.37) | −0.028 (−0.51) |
LEV | −0.012 (−0.97) | 0.086 (1.50) | 0.072 (1.26) | 0.102 * (1.89) |
ROA | −0.322 (−0.99) | 0.360 (0.23) | 0.175 (0.11) | −1.364 * (−0.91) |
Top1 | 0.005 *** (6.53) | 0.017 *** (5.00) | 0.018 *** (5.17) | 0.010 *** (3.02) |
TobinQ | −0.003 (−0.15) | −0.316 *** (−2.86) | −0.332 *** (−3.01) | −0.243 ** (−2.32) |
Age | −0.004 ** (−2.01) | −0.010 (−1.07) | −0.009 (−0.96) | 0.000 (0.03) |
Cflow | 0.297 * (1.66) | −0.537 (−0.63) | −0.624 (−0.73) | −0.233 (−0.29) |
Year, Industry, Province FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Constant | 3.412 *** (38.73) | −6.497 *** (−9.14) | −7.193 *** (−9.48) | −6.168 *** (−8.85) |
N | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 |
R2 | 0.210 | 0.324 | 0.330 | 0.401 |
F | 22.25 | 40.14 | 36.70 | 44.68 |
Model (6) | Model (7) | Model (8) | Model (9) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | GTI | CSR | GTI | GTI |
ER | 1.700 *** (3.89) | 0.302 *** (3.42) | 1.141 *** (2.79) | 1.153 *** (2.85) |
CSR | 1.851 *** (10.46) | 1.638 *** (8.94) | ||
MC | 0.335 *** (8.96) | 0.022 *** (2.94) | 0.294 *** (8.41) | 0.289 *** (8.36) |
CSR × MC | 0.449 *** (3.94) | |||
MTB | −0.134 ** (−2.32) | −0.056 *** (−4.72) | −0.032 (−0.58) | −0.018 (−0.33) |
LEV | 0.054 (0.92) | −0.011 (−0.94) | 0.075 (1.37) | 0.088 (1.63) |
ROA | −2.521 (−1.56) | −0.459 (−1.40) | −1.671 (−1.11) | −1.567 (−1.05) |
Top1 | 0.020 *** (5.67) | 0.004 *** (5.75) | 0.012 *** (3.70) | 0.011 *** (3.20) |
TobinQ | −0.251 ** (−2.20) | 0.003 (0.11) | −0.255 ** (−2.42) | −0.260 ** (−2.49) |
Age | −0.010 (−1.12) | −0.003 * (−1.80) | −0.004 (−0.47) | 0.001 (0.16) |
Cflow | 0.350 (0.40) | 0.322 * (1.81) | −0.246 (−0.30) | −0.324 (−0.40) |
Year, Industry, Province FE | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Constant | −1.439 *** (−3.19) | 3.336 *** (36.48) | −7.615 *** (−10.52) | −6.898 *** (−9.33) |
N | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 |
R2 | 0.295 | 0.220 | 0.394 | 0.408 |
F | 31.12 | 20.93 | 43.48 | 41.79 |
Model (10) | Model (11) | Model (12) | Model (13) | Model (14) | Model (15) | Model (16) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | GTIE | GTIE | GTIE | GTIE | CSR | GTIE | GTIE |
ER | 0.238 *** (2.67) | 0.160 * (1.79) | 0.215 ** (2.41) | 0.526 *** (4.91) | 0.136 (1.53) | 0.139 (1.57) | |
CSR | 0.149 *** (4.81) | 0.145 *** (4.77) | 0.150 *** (4.85) | 0.137 (4.41) | |||
MC | 0.118 *** (3.09) | 0.115 *** (2.93) | −0.004 (−0.08) | 0.116 *** (2.99) | 0.113 *** (2.94) | ||
CSR × MC | 0.319 *** (2.77) | 0.321 *** (2.80) | |||||
Control Variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Year, Industry, Province | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
N | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 |
R2 | 0.065 | 0.094 | 0.112 | 0.076 | 0.154 | 0.106 | 0.115 |
F | 6.09 | 8.16 | 8.89 | 6.39 | 14.22 | 8.29 | 8.32 |
Model (17) | Model (18) | Model (19) | Model (20) | Model (21) | Model (22) | Model (23) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | GTI | GTI | GTI | GTI | CSR | GTI | GTI |
ER | 3.207 *** (0.117) | 2.485 *** (0.122) | 3.796 *** (0.136) | 0.323 *** (0.053) | 3.036 *** (0.135) | 2.989 *** (0.135) | |
CSR | 2.241 *** (0.038) | 2.247 *** (0.048) | 1.818 *** (0.039) | 2.084 *** (0.047) | |||
MC | 0.306 *** (0.010) | 0.362 *** (0.007) | 0.033 *** (0.004) | 0.260 *** (0.008) | 0.311 *** (0.010) | ||
CSR × MC | 0.285 *** (0.026) | 0.249 *** (0.026) | |||||
Control Variables | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Year, Industry, Province | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
N | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 | 680 |
Model (24) | Model (25) | |
---|---|---|
Variable | GTI | GTI |
ER | 1.010 * (1.74) | |
CSR | 2.157 *** (9.73) | 2.155 *** (8.40) |
MC | 0.267 *** (6.12) | |
ER × SOE | 0.505 *** (2.68) | |
CSR × MC × SOE | −1.187 ** (−2.41) | |
Control Variables | Yes | Yes |
Year, Industry, Province | Yes | Yes |
N | 680 | 680 |
R2 | 0.368 | 0.408 |
F | 24.36 | 26.13 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhao, Y.; Huang, Y.; Hu, S.; Sun, J. How Tripartite Stakeholders Promote Green Technology Innovation of China’s Heavily Polluting Enterprises? Sustainability 2023, 15, 9650. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129650
Zhao Y, Huang Y, Hu S, Sun J. How Tripartite Stakeholders Promote Green Technology Innovation of China’s Heavily Polluting Enterprises? Sustainability. 2023; 15(12):9650. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129650
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhao, Ying, Yongchun Huang, Shiliang Hu, and Jun Sun. 2023. "How Tripartite Stakeholders Promote Green Technology Innovation of China’s Heavily Polluting Enterprises?" Sustainability 15, no. 12: 9650. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15129650