1. Introduction
Given the escalated gravity of interest in exploring rural revitalization in the contemporary development discourse, researchers have recognized the pivotal role that rural areas play in national economies, ecological sustainability, and social fabric [
1]. It is argued that rural revitalization’s significance extends beyond the mere enhancement of agricultural productivity to encompassing the wider objectives of economic diversification, poverty alleviation, and environmental conservation [
2]. There is growing consensus that warrants empirical scrutiny on the subject of rural revitalization due to the multifaceted challenges that the rural communities face such as economic underdevelopment and environmental degradation [
3,
4]. Thus, the imperative of rural revitalization is not only an economic necessity, but also a social and environmental need. In addition to this, sustainable rural revitalization (e.g., inclusive economic growth, sustainable agriculture, and resilient communities) can contribute significantly to achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [
3]. From this perspective, recent research has identified the integration of digital technologies and green development practices as crucial elements for transforming rural economies and promoting environmental sustainability [
5]. Nevertheless, the authors conducted an exploratory study of the interplay between digital technologies and rural development and paved the way to empirically assess the linkage between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. Hence, empirical investigation of the antecedents of rural revitalization is not just about addressing the disparities between urban and rural areas; rather our study harnesses the potential of rural regions as engines of sustainable development, innovation, and cultural preservation.
According to Nosova et al. [
6] (p. 659), digital economic transformation represents “the saturation of business processes with digital technologies leads to the digital transformation of the economy” and leverages digital technologies to drive efficiency, innovation, and inclusivity [
7]. This transformation is particularly critical for rural areas, where the digital divide has historically impeded economic growth and integration into broader markets. The rationale for linking digital economic transformation as an antecedent to rural revitalization lies in its transformative potential to overcome geographic isolation, enhance access to information and markets, and foster entrepreneurial initiatives. This is further substantiated by Rijswijk et al. [
8], who argued that digital platforms can enable rural businesses to reach broad markets and yield higher revenue streams. In addition, agricultural practices can be significantly improved through digital tools and services (e.g., precision farming, market access, and supply chain efficiency) [
1]. As a result, digital economic transformation might offer avenues for rural areas to move beyond traditional agriculture-based livelihoods to include sustainable services and digital entrepreneurship. Thus, the integration of digital economic transformation is essential for fostering sustainable development in rural areas.
Building on the foundational role of digital economic transformation in fostering sustainable development within rural areas, the concept of green entrepreneurship has emerged as a significant pathway that bridges digital innovation with rural revitalization. Green entrepreneurship refers to “the continuous commitment of enterprises to ethical behavior that promotes economic development and improves the quality of life of the labor force, families, local and global communities, and future generations.” [
9,
10] (p. 413). Furthermore, green entrepreneurship leverages the transformative capabilities provided by digital advancements to offer business solutions that are not only economically viable, but also environmentally responsive [
11]. The intermediary role of green entrepreneurship offers an opportunity to address the environmental challenges linked to economic growth, thereby augmenting rural revitalization. Thus, the emphasis on green entrepreneurship in the context of digital transformation highlights a nuanced pathway through which rural economies can develop inclusive and environmentally responsible growth.
Following the exploration of green entrepreneurship in the nexus between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization, green innovation has ascended as a transformative progression from green entrepreneurship to elevated rural revitalization. Green innovation involves the development and implementation of new products, processes, or services that minimize environmental impacts, conserve natural resources, and promote the use of sustainable materials [
12]. Tseng et al. [
13] (p. 72) categorized green innovation into four main categories: “managerial innovation, product innovation, process innovation, and technological innovation”. Furthermore, Yang and Liu sanctioned that green innovation transforms the principles of green entrepreneurship into tangible practices and technologies that can significantly enhance environmental sustainability within rural economies. Taken together, the study proposes a serial mediation model that digital economic transformation promotes green entrepreneurship, which in turn, leads to green innovation, thus contributing to rural revitalization. By examining the serial mediation role of green entrepreneurship and green innovation into the relation of digital economic transformation and rural revitalization, this study presents a more nuanced understanding of the factors that impact sustainable development in rural settings.
While recent studies have highlighted the transformative potential of digital economic transformation and green entrepreneurship in rural revitalization efforts [
14,
15,
16], there remains a gap in empirical research examining the interplay between these factors and their impact on rural revitalization. Specifically, there is a need for studies that empirically assess the relationship between digital economic transformation, green entrepreneurship, green innovation, and rural revitalization within the context of the Sustainable Development Goals. Therefore, this study aimed to address this gap by exploring the serial mediation role of green entrepreneurship and green innovation in the relationship between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. The research questions guiding this study are as follows:
To what extent does digital economic transformation influence green entrepreneurship in rural areas?
How does green entrepreneurship mediate the relationship between digital economic transformation and green innovation in rural settings?
What is the serial mediation effect of green entrepreneurship and green innovation on the relationship between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization?
These research questions guide the empirical investigation into the antecedents of rural revitalization, providing insights into the mechanisms through which digital economic transformation and green entrepreneurship contribute to sustainable development in rural regions.
2. Digital Economic Transformation and Rural Revitalization
Digital economic transformation has been a major factor in the past few years in the upheaval of regions [
5] and the production of significant effects in the rural area [
1]. According to preliminary research [
17], the process of digitization can have an effect on rural sectors in general as well as agriculture specifically (e.g., defining new and richer services, helping to efficient use of resources). The production side of the agrifood industry has been affected by the digital revolution because new technologies provide customers with full visibility and traceability of the production process. This has resulted in significant changes to consumer behavior and business models of agricultural product companies.
Digital economic transformation provides new tools for local agrifood sectors and rural areas to modify their strategies and actions in real-time [
18]. Additionally, it fosters cooperation amongst various stakeholders engaged in agrifood tourism and rural revitalization, serving as catalysts for the fostering of relationships in settings where social cohesion precludes the ad hoc formation of networks. In rural areas, where there are often many small-scale producers with little coordination or rare cooperation among themselves, leading to ineffective development of the rural tourism industry, digitalization can play a supportive role [
1]. According to this viewpoint, the difficulty of rural revitalization that builds on the agrifood and food-tourism sectors is included in the requirement to link the various players in the value chain, concentrating on the abilities and customs that each of them employs to define the uniqueness of the region. The increasing demand for communication between the various parties involved in rural revitalization may be met by digital technologies.
3. Green Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship has historically been researched, examined, and applied as a means of creating a type of self-employment that can yield financial gains [
19] or as a means of creating jobs [
20]. In another way, entrepreneurship has traditionally been seen as a means of promoting economic development [
21], while social and environmental concerns have been disregarded [
22]. However, as governments, NGOs, researchers, and businesses place more emphasis on environmental issues, and as the idea of green development gains traction [
4], a number of scholars [
22] have asserted that entrepreneurship should not be limited to making money. Furthermore, some academics contend that entrepreneurship is a means of guiding economic sectors toward sustainable growth [
23].
According to Baker and Welter’s [
24] theory, entrepreneurship ought to concentrate on undertakings that address the demands of the modern economy by serving commercial, social, and environmental goals. Furthermore, Corbett and Montgomery [
25] contend that business owners must incorporate and modify sustainability into their business plans if they hope to build a profitable company that advances development. As a result, during the past several years, businesses and entrepreneurs have been more interested in learning about the true effects of their ventures on society and the environment. Thus, the conventional definition of entrepreneurship, which emphasizes value creation in terms of financial gains, has also been expanded to include nonfinancial advantages [
11].
The notion of “green entrepreneurship”, also known as “greenopreneurship” [
26], has emerged as a result of some researchers’ increased focus on the relationship between green development and entrepreneurship. According to Gu et al. [
27], green entrepreneurship is founded on and associated with the triple bottom line (TBL), which consists of three main aspects: (1) environmental, which considers long-term protection and a reduction in negative effects; (2) social, where attention is given to the customers, stakeholders, partners, workers, and community; and (3) economic, which is dependent on economic performance. Accordingly, green entrepreneurs are now seen as change agents who are dedicated to achieving a balance between social welfare, environmental preservation, and economic viability.
In the context of rural revitalization [
28], green entrepreneurship holds particular significance as a catalyst for sustainable economic development in rural areas. Rural communities often face unique challenges including limited access to resources, economic diversification, and environmental sustainability [
29]. Green entrepreneurship offers a promising avenue to address these challenges by fostering innovation [
30], creating new employment opportunities [
31], and promoting environmentally responsible business practices [
32]. By leveraging digital technologies and green development principles, rural entrepreneurs can not only enhance the economic viability of their ventures, but also contribute to the preservation of natural resources and the well-being of local communities [
33,
34]. Thus, green entrepreneurship has emerged as a vital driver of rural revitalization efforts, aligning with broader goals of promoting inclusive and environmentally sustainable development [
35,
36,
37].
7. Discussion of Findings and Their Implications
This study examined the impact of digital economic transformation on rural revitalization and investigated how green entrepreneurship and green innovation mediate the relationship between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. Our findings demonstrate that digital economic transformation does not have a direct impact on rural revitalization. However, its influence primarily operates indirectly through green entrepreneurship and green innovation, accounting for 15.8% of their impact on rural revitalization. Our results align with earlier studies. For instance, Ref. [
63] discovered that the degree of entrepreneurial orientation played a mediating role in the impact of big data analytics capabilities on the business model. In addition, Zameer et al. [
64] determined that there was no significant correlation between the business analytics and green environmental orientation. They also found that green innovation completely underpinned the impact of business analytics on competitive advantage.
The findings further indicate that green entrepreneurship plays a role in mediating the link between digital economic transformation and green innovation. Utilizing digital applications such as AI, IoT, and big data analytics enhances understanding, resulting in improved entrepreneurial pursuits, and consequently enhanced ecological innovation [
38]. Additionally, according to Bickley et al. [
41], obtaining big data analytics capabilities and AI integration can bolster the efforts of green entrepreneurs in creating environmentally friendly business solutions. Furthermore, Industry 4.0 technology has facilitated firms in enhancing green entrepreneurship through improved planning, execution, and forecasting [
65]. Subsequently, green innovation serves as a mediator in the relationship between green entrepreneurship and rural revitalization. Academics concur that implementing digital technologies enhances both the innovative performance of an enterprise and contributes to ecological sustainability [
66]. Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of research that has examined the comprehensive influence of green entrepreneurship and green innovation and rural revitalization [
67]. The results of our research align with other studies by Yin et al. [
68] that validate the influence of green innovation on rural revitalization. Furthermore, our study showed that the green innovation variable is the most important factor in the impact of digital economic transformation and rural revitalization and plays a crucial role in establishing sustainability. This is consistent with the findings of Shahzad et al. [
69], as it acknowledges the function of green innovation in mediating the association between technology adoption and environmental sustainability.
The link between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization is mediated sequentially by green entrepreneurship and green innovation. The impact of green innovation is significant, with both direct and indirect effects. However, the indirect influence through green entrepreneurship is more significant. Green entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in facilitating the transition to sustainable solutions [
46]. The results are corroborated by the research conducted by Cen et al. [
70], which investigated the influence of Industry 4.0 technologies on the capacity of industrial upgrading to enhance rural revitalization.
Specifically, our research expands the extant body of knowledge in the wider research spectrum of the technological sphere such as digital economic transformation, big data analytics, AI, Industry 4.0, and IoT [
38,
65,
69], among others. Since the inception of Industry 4.0 and machine learning, there has been a growing academic and practical interest in exploring the antecedents and consequences of digital transformation [
65]. However, there has been little research that has explored the influence of digital economic transformation on rural revitalization. By examining the association between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization, our research extends the existing literature and contributes to the broader literature on technology and sustainability. Furthermore, our research found that the connection between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization is not direct, rather, there exists some intermediary paths through which the relationship is cultivated. Subsequently, linking green entrepreneurship as a mediating factor enriches the extant scholarly works on entrepreneurship, sustainable entrepreneurship [
44], and most specifically, rural entrepreneurship [
71]. This addition to the current academic debate substantially advances the theoretical, empirical as well as practical implications of our proposed model. In addition, our study further found that the relationship between digital economic transformation is further facilitated through the inculcation of green innovation as a crucial sequel. Accordingly, these insights were translated as well as empirically validated in a serial mediation mechanism such as green entrepreneurship, and green innovation sequentially mediates the relationship between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. Afterward, our research represents the inaugural exploration of the indirect association between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization through a serial mediation path by employing green entrepreneurship and green innovation.
8. Conclusions
The current study explored a serial mediation model encompassing green entrepreneurship and green innovation as the sequential mediators of the indirect effects of digital economic transformation on rural revitalization. The study examined the proposed model by employing multivariate analytical techniques and rendered empirical support to the hypothesized relationships. Our findings confirm the relationships between (1) digital economic transformation and green entrepreneurship; (2) green entrepreneurship and green innovation; and (3) green innovation and rural revitalization. Furthermore, our study confirms (a) the mediating role of green entrepreneurship between digital economic transformation and green innovation; (b) the mediating role of green innovation between green entrepreneurship and rural revitalization; and (c) the serial mediating roles of green entrepreneurship and green innovation between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. Finally, our study presents numerous noteworthy theoretical and practical implications.
8.1. Practical Implication of Research
The practical implications of this study extend significantly into various sectors, particularly in enhancing the effectiveness of green entrepreneurship and innovation within rural revitalization efforts. By demonstrating the critical role of digital economic transformation as a catalyst for green entrepreneurship and green innovation, this research provides a blueprint for stakeholders on how to leverage technology for sustainable development. For policymakers, the findings underscore the necessity of creating supportive environments that encourage the adoption of digital technologies in rural areas. Efforts may be invested in broadband infrastructure, providing training programs to improve digital literacy, and offering incentives for businesses that integrate sustainable practices into their operations.
For entrepreneurs and businesses, the study highlights the potential of utilizing digital tools to drive sustainability initiatives and develop eco-friendly products and services. Our findings suggest that integrating Industry 4.0 technologies can lead to greater operational efficiencies, improved planning and execution, and innovative solutions to environmental challenges. Consequently, businesses that prioritize sustainability can not only contribute to rural revitalization, but also tap into new markets and consumer segments that value eco-conscious products.
Furthermore, the research points to the need for collaboration between governments, industries, and educational institutions to foster an ecosystem that nurtures green entrepreneurship and innovation. For instance, there may be initiatives such as public–private partnerships to fund green startups, competitions that encourage sustainable innovations, and curriculum development that incorporates elements of digital literacy and sustainability. By acting on these practical implications, stakeholders can collectively work toward a more sustainable and prosperous future for rural communities, aligning with broader global objectives such as the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.
8.2. Limitations and Future Research
The study has several limitations. First, the data collection was conducted on Chinese respondents, thereby limiting the study’s scope across various cultural contexts. Second, data were collected by employing measurements based on the perceptions of our respondents. Therefore, there may be issues related to CMBs in our study. Although we tested the collinearity assessment to mitigate these issues, caution should be taken when generalizing the findings. Third, our research design was based on a cross-sectional method rather than a longitudinal one.
We suggest future studies to incorporate and analyze additional variables that might also influence the relationship between digital economic transformation and rural revitalization. For instance, confounding variables should be treated and analyzed to gauge any potential effects of these variables on the proposed relationships. Furthermore, we expect that digital economic transformation engenders the facilitation of tacit knowledge, however, there should be some intermediary path that translates such tacit knowledge into entrepreneurial green ventures. Thus, future research should focus on this limitation, which was not addressed in our study. Additionally, mixed methodology and longitudinal research designs could be employed to generalize the findings of this study.