1. Introduction
The motivation for EGI is multifaceted, intertwined with various factors, and emerges as a proactive response by enterprises to increasingly critical environmental issues and constantly changing market conditions [
1,
2,
3]. Through green innovation, enterprises can attain comprehensive and long-term advantages in sustainability, market competition, and regulatory compliance [
4]. The existing research indicates that the driving forces behind EGI stem from considerations related to the environment, society, regulations, and the market [
5,
6]. First, the stakeholder theory suggests that the image of enterprises in society is increasingly in the spotlight and that public concern about environmental issues in particular has pushed enterprises to take on more environmental responsibility [
7,
8,
9]. Meanwhile, in the face of increasing environmental requirements, enterprises, under pressure from multiple stakeholders, will release positive signals to stakeholders by adopting green innovations to show that they are playing an active role in sustainable development, reducing environmental pollution, wasting resources, and improving the efficiency of resource utilization, so as to build up an environmentally friendly corporate image [
10]. Secondly, legitimacy theory suggests that governments and international organizations continue to strengthen the formulation and implementation of environmental regulations, which puts more stringent environmental requirements on enterprises, and that if enterprises want to achieve long-term sustainable development, they must follow the legal requirements and implement environmental protection measures, such as green innovation, to ensure institutional recognition and alleviate the legitimacy pressure [
11,
12]. Concurrently, intensifying market competition compels enterprises to continually enhance the environmental quality of their products and service levels. This not only helps consolidate the market share but also attracts more environmentally conscious consumers, boosting the competitive edge of enterprises in the market.
Currently, environmental issues such as climate change, resource depletion, and ecosystem collapse have transcended national borders, becoming global focal points of concern [
13,
14]. These issues not only threaten the balance of natural ecosystems but also have profound implications for the sustainability of human society. With the escalation of global environmental problems, the demand for a better ecological environment is increasing [
15,
16]. Simultaneously, enterprises, as one of the most influential economic entities, are identified as major culprits and contributors to environmental pollution, drawing attention from the media, the public, and the government, among other societal sectors [
17,
18,
19]. Undeniably, enterprises have made significant contributions to economic growth; however, their actions have raised the dilemma of “greed versus green”. As environmental issues become a “threat” to public life, various sectors of society begin to condemn pollution-causing enterprises for environmental destruction [
20]. In this context, enterprises may be compelled by legitimacy pressure to overhaul their business and production models, intensify research and development of green technologies and innovations, and meet more stringent environmental standards [
21,
22]. However, existing research indicates that when faced with the trade-off between economic benefits and green innovation, enterprises often prioritize economic gains and overlook the green innovation required for sustainable development due to the high economic costs involved [
23]. Therefore, how to promote EGI has become a critical issue requiring urgent attention.
Under this background, some countries and cities are beginning to implement governance policies aimed at guiding enterprises to participate in green development and catalyzing their transition to sustainability [
24,
25,
26]. Among these initiatives, China’s CCC policy provides an opportunity to explore the relationship between urban governance policies and EGI. On the one hand, the civilized city brand is a prestigious reflection of the high level of civilization in Chinese cities, comprehensively representing the city’s level of civilized development. The CCC policy emphasizes the coordinated development of economic, political, ecological, and spiritual civilization, placing higher legitimacy demands on enterprise environmental behaviors from multidimensional perspectives [
27,
28]. On the other hand, compared to other policies, the CCC evaluation system is more comprehensive in terms of environmental governance, protection, and regulatory aspects. Its evaluation methods and assessment systems are also more stringent, exerting greater constraints on enterprises [
29]. Particularly, the assessment system incorporates selection and review mechanisms, prompting local governments to enhance supervision and governance measures for enterprises to win the evaluation [
30,
31]. However, the existing research does not conclusively determine whether this policy can promote enterprise environmental behavior and enhance green innovation. Similarly, the existing research lacks clarity on the influencing mechanisms of such policies on EGI behaviors. Therefore, at this stage, there is an urgent need to clarify whether CCC can promote EGI and what the mechanism of its influence is.
On this basis, this paper further analyzes whether CCC can promote EGI and its mechanisms through the DID model. The contributions of this study are as follows: On one hand, against the background of increasingly serious global environmental problems, this paper explores the effect of the CCC on EGI and its mechanism on the global consensus of sustainable development, which not only provides more specific and practical analytical experience for future research but also presents a new perspective to deepen our understanding of the relationship between urban governance and corporate sustainable development. On the other hand, through the quantitative assessment, this study not only summarizes the successful experiences and practices but also identifies the existing problems and challenges, thus putting forward corresponding policy recommendations and reform directions. Such specific and practical suggestions not only contribute to improving the effect of the current policy but also provide an important reference for future related policies that demonstrate in-depth thinking and specific guidance for the promotion of green transformation in enterprises and sustainable development in cities.
2. Literature Review and Research Hypothesis
2.1. Literature Review
The relationship between urban construction and EGI is a core issue currently receiving significant attention in the field of sustainable development. As the central hub of human activities, the level of urban development directly affects the distribution of global resources and the sustainability of the environment [
32,
33]. Enterprises, as the driving force behind urban economic systems, not only impact their own competitiveness through their performance in green innovation but also profoundly shape the ecological landscape of cities [
34,
35]. Firstly, scientifically and reasonably governed cities and the construction of green infrastructure play a crucial role in reducing urban resource consumption and environmental pollution. This includes measures such as increasing urban green spaces, optimizing transportation systems, and introducing renewable energy sources. These actions not only enhance the ecological environment of cities but also provide a more favorable business environment for enterprises, stimulating their active participation in urban construction.
Secondly, EGI, as a core element of corporate social responsibility, has long been a focus of scholarly research. Existing studies elucidate the pivotal role of green innovation in the sustainability of enterprises [
36]. Enterprises can enhance their competitiveness and gain consumer recognition in the market by introducing clean technologies, optimizing production processes, and driving the research and development of green products [
37]. These research findings reveal the positive impact of enterprises actively engaging in green innovation on their own development and the overall green upgrading of the industry chain. Simultaneously, collaborative innovation between cities and enterprises is considered a key mechanism for promoting sustainable development [
38,
39]. City governments can provide a better external environment for enterprises by formulating environmental policies, offering incentives, and supporting green technology research and development, thus reducing the costs of enterprises engaging in green innovation [
40]. This collaborative innovation mechanism fosters positive interaction between cities and enterprises during the sustainable development process, mutually propelling the progress of green development.
CCC, as an important means of promoting sustainable urban development, has received much attention from scholars in recent years. However, although a number of studies have been conducted to explore the effects and impacts of CCC implementation, there are still some shortcomings [
27]. First, there is a relative lack of current assessment of the implementation effects of CCC, especially since its specific impact in promoting EGI has not been systematically studied. The existing studies are often limited to policy advocacy and statistics of surface data, lacking in-depth analysis of actual policy implementation as well as EGI behavior [
41]. Second, there is a lack of research frameworks and theoretical models. Although existing studies have explored related areas such as urban governance, corporate social responsibility, and innovation theory, they often lack systematic theoretical guidance, resulting in research results that lack depth and breadth. In addition, the research methodology is relatively single, often limited to qualitative or quantitative analysis, and it lacks multi-perspective and multi-level methodological innovation [
42]. The complex mechanisms and pathways by which CCC drives EGI have not been sufficiently studied.
In summary, the existing literature reveals the close and intricate relationship between urban construction and EGI. Despite the existence of these theoretical frameworks, there remains a research gap in the current literature: a lack of in-depth investigation into the mechanisms and approaches through which CCC specifically promotes EGI. The existing research often focuses on a singular perspective, either urban construction or EGI, lacking a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between the two. Nevertheless, from the available research, it is evident that CCC provides space for enterprises’ green development. Scientific planning and the construction of environmentally friendly infrastructure, such as sewage treatment plants and waste disposal facilities, provide a greener production foundation for enterprises, making it easier for them to obtain green certifications and enhance their competitiveness in the green market. However, the actual effectiveness of these efforts is yet to be determined.
2.2. Research Hypothesis
Civilization has the most fundamental impact on societal development by shaping ideal beliefs, moral concepts, and value systems. The advancement of urban civilization can reshape the collective perception of social responsibility by governments, enterprises, and society as a whole [
43]. Firstly, the development of urban civilization can innovate the governance perspective of the government, enhancing the institutional supply of social responsibility for enterprises at all levels. On one hand, improvements in enterprise social responsibility rely on the refinement of governmental governance perspectives [
44,
45]. The higher the level of urban civilization, the higher the effectiveness of ideological concepts and institutional governance in its regulatory rules. On the other hand, the supply of democratic, scientific, and standardized external institutions prompts enterprises to shape new organizational cultures, structures, and conventions, thereby propelling enterprises toward the sharing of social values [
46,
47]. Secondly, the development of urban civilization can cultivate the altruistic views of enterprises, enhancing the intrinsic motivation of enterprise owners and executives to fulfill social responsibilities. Altruism suggests that the pure moral cultivation of enterprise owners or the ethical culture within an enterprise can compel it to shoulder social responsibilities. Thirdly, the development of urban civilization can foster public values, enhancing overall societal supervision and constraints on enterprise social responsibility. The development of civilization can shape public values regarding fairness, justice, empathy, and friendliness, inspiring public awareness of rights, responsibilities, and the monitoring of enterprise behavior [
48]. On this basis, citizens’ values can converge to form societal consensus, guiding public opinion through media, networks, and other channels, and forming constraints on enterprise behavior under reputation mechanisms. Numerous studies have highlighted the advantages of social supervision, such as widespread foundation, numerous channels, and low costs, which can alleviate information asymmetry issues between governments and enterprises, constraining tax compliance, charitable donations, and environmental governance behavior.
The CCC has profound implications for promoting EGI. The essence of this relationship lies in the higher demands that urban construction places on the environmental and operational practices of enterprises, simultaneously creating more market opportunities for enterprises [
49]. Firstly, as urban attention to environmental protection and sustainability continues to rise, the CCC advocates stricter environmental standards and requirements. This compels enterprises not only to comply with more stringent environmental regulations but also to surpass these requirements actively, adopting and promoting green technological innovations. In order to meet or exceed urban environmental standards, enterprises must increase investment in green innovation, optimize production processes, reduce resource wastage, and steer products and services toward more environmentally sustainable directions. Secondly, governments in the CCC often formulate a series of green policies, providing incentives such as rewards, tax reductions, and financial support to enterprises. This policy support not only lowers the costs of enterprises engaging in green innovation but also provides greater economic returns, making green innovation more attractive. Encouraged by such policies, enterprises are more willing to engage in green technology research and development, leading to the continuous emergence of green innovation. For example, government subsidies or tax incentives for enterprises that use renewable energy will encourage them to adopt more renewable energy technologies. By granting subsidies or incentives to enterprises for the application of green technologies and the research and development of resource-saving and environmentally friendly products, the government can stimulate enterprises to actively engage in green innovation. Such a subsidy policy can reduce the economic cost for enterprises to invest in green innovation, thus increasing the incentive for EGI.
Furthermore, CCC creates broader market opportunities for enterprises. As urban residents’ awareness of environmental protection and sustainability increases, the demand for green products and services also grows. Through green innovation, enterprises can better meet market demands, enhance product competitiveness, and expand market share. The expansion of these market opportunities provides enterprises with better development prospects and becomes an intrinsic driving force for EGI. Additionally, the CCC emphasizes social responsibility and sustainable development, gradually making enterprises realize that participating in the ecological construction of cities not only provides a competitive advantage in business but also establishes a positive social image. Through this process, enterprises gradually recognize that green innovation is not only a contribution to the environment but also a fulfillment of their own social responsibility, helping to establish a positive image in society. Therefore, CCC, through various aspects such as raising environmental standards, policy support, and creating market opportunities, stimulates enterprises to actively engage in green innovation. On this basis, Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 are proposed:
Hypothesis 1. CCC can promote EGI.
Hypothesis 2. CCC will promote EGI by increasing the regional environmental regulations and environmental subsidy levels.
6. Conclusions
6.1. Conclusions
This study holds significant research implications and innovation in exploring the relationship between CCC and EGI. Firstly, green innovation, as a crucial strategy adopted by enterprises in response to increasingly severe environmental issues and dynamically changing market environments, holds paramount importance for the sustainable development of enterprises. A thorough investigation into the impact of CCC on EGI can provide valuable insights and guidance for both enterprises and governments, facilitating the achievement of sustainable development and environmental protection goals. Secondly, by choosing CCC policy as the research focus, this study delves into the promoting role of urban governance policies on EGI, expanding the research perspective on the impact mechanisms of urban governance policies on enterprise behavior, and demonstrating a degree of research innovation.
This study contributes to filling the research gap regarding the relationship between CCC and EGI, introducing CCC policy as a research subject, and broadening the understanding of driving forces. The findings confirm the positive impact of CCC policy on EGI. The results regarding the impact mechanism indicate that CCC policy enhances regional environmental regulations and increases environmental subsidies for enterprises, thereby elevating their levels of green innovation. Additionally, heterogeneous results suggest a significant positive promotion effect of this policy on the quantity of EGI, but its impact on the quality of green innovation is not yet significant.
Future research could employ more diverse empirical research methods to enhance the reliability and applicability of research conclusions. Moreover, considering the limitations of causal relationships in this study, future research might adopt more rigorous research designs and analytical methods to further validate the findings and propose more actionable policy recommendations. In addition to quantitative analysis, future research can also adopt qualitative research methods, such as case studies and in-depth interviews, to dig deeper into the intrinsic motivation and practical experience of enterprises’ green innovation so as to provide a more comprehensive reference for policy formulation. At the same time, future research can deeply explore the mechanism of CCC’s influence on EGI. Specifically, in-depth analysis can be carried out from the aspects of policy implementation effect, enterprise response strategy, and industry chain influence, in order to better understand the path of policy influence on enterprise behavior.
6.2. Policy Recommendations
Based on the results of this study, some policy recommendations for CCC can be put forward to promote the further development of EGI: First, the government can encourage enterprises to increase their investment in green technology R&D and innovation by providing economic incentives such as environmental protection subsidies and tax concessions. Especially for green product production, energy saving, and emission reduction, the government should increase subsidies to reduce the cost of enterprise innovation and increase the enthusiasm of enterprises for green innovation. Secondly, the government should also strengthen the supervision and evaluation of the implementation of the CCC. It should establish a sound regulatory system, strengthen the supervision and inspection of enterprises’ environmental protection behaviors, and impose severe penalties on enterprises violating environmental regulations to ensure the implementation of the policy. At the same time, the government can encourage enterprises to cooperate with scientific research institutions and universities to strengthen green technology innovation and transformation. Through the establishment of scientific and technological innovation platforms, the establishment of scientific research project funding, etc., to promote the transformation of scientific and technological achievements into actual productivity and promote the rapid development of EGI. Finally, the government can strengthen the information disclosure and publicity of enterprises’ green innovation achievements to enhance the public’s awareness and recognition of enterprises’ environmental protection behaviors. Through the establishment of a green product certification system and the release of corporate environmental behavior rankings, enterprises are guided to pay more attention to environmental protection and green development.